The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-04-2014, 12:01 PM
The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy
So before I start I just want to make a couple things clear:



1) I'm atheist
2) I understand that many of you guys will disagree with me so please reply so I can have a better perspective
3) This is just a general idea, not even worthy to be called a hypothesis or theory
4) Seeing that I am atheist, there are three relevant precepts to keep in mind of where I am coming from:
a) God is a made up superstition designed to help people cope with the idea of death and uncertainty
b) religion seeks to control people by using false book such as the BOM, Bible, Quran, Tora, ect.
c) There is no verifiable, quantifiable, observable, empirical evidence to support any current theories of a God, Savior, or One True Religion.


That being said, I may now actually say something that will surprise some people:


I am atheist, I very much dislike religion, but I don't dislike the idea of a God, a Divine Creator, and I do not discourage the pursuit of evidence of that creator. I don't think it's that crazy of an idea, I think religion is crazy (seeing as the mormon faith and surrounding christians really put a bad taste in my mouth and my mind does not allow my to believe in any sort of dogma without reason and logic.)


Being an atheist, I believe the pursuit of science would eventually unveil the existence of a god if he/she/it existed.


Any true atheist or logical thinker cannot deny the possibility of a god, and would certainly have to accept the existence of one if given evidence.


Atheists and agnostics deny religion and don't focus too much on the possibility of a god, theists usually accept religion because they believe in the possibility of a god, or perhaps are convinced that there has to be a god.


That being said, I think it is inherently unavoidable to come upon the idea of a god or creator.


I propose that individuals join religions only because of they agree with that assumption: the existence of a god. Religions then manipulate that innocent belief to impose dogmas, rules, cultural constructs, ect.


This is my proposal because because I do not necessarily see the idea of a belief of a god very destructive, but I do see the the belief systems of religion to be extremely destructive.


What do you guys think? I need some feed back to either correct this proposal or get rid of it entirely.


Do you think people join religions and follow them without question only because it agrees with the assumption of a higher intelligence?


(I hope I articulated this well enough.)
Also, that being said, I do reject the importance or existence of a god or higher intelligence. I'm not sure if that was clear. I just don't condemn the belief of a god, I condemn religion.

"A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be."- Albert Einstein.

"We are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star. But we can understand the Universe. That makes us something very special." Steven Hawking
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2014, 12:19 PM
RE: The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy
(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  So before I start I just want to make a couple things clear:

1) I'm atheist
2) I understand that many of you guys will disagree with me so please reply so I can have a better perspective
3) This is just a general idea, not even worthy to be called a hypothesis or theory
4) Seeing that I am atheist, there are three relevant precepts to keep in mind of where I am coming from:
a) God is a made up superstition designed to help people cope with the idea of death and uncertainty
b) religion seeks to control people by using false book such as the BOM, Bible, Quran, Tora, ect.
c) There is no verifiable, quantifiable, observable, empirical evidence to support any current theories of a God, Savior, or One True Religion.

That being said, I may now actually say something that will surprise some people:

I am atheist, I very much dislike religion, but I don't dislike the idea of a God, a Divine Creator, and I do not discourage the pursuit of evidence of that creator. I don't think it's that crazy of an idea, I think religion is crazy (seeing as the mormon faith and surrounding christians really put a bad taste in my mouth and my mind does not allow my to believe in any sort of dogma without reason and logic.)

You need to clear up your terminology. You literally said "God is a made up superstition" and then literally said you don't dislike the idea [of a made up superstition].

If you're calling possible the same thing you just called made up then you're being rather inconsistent (and incoherent!).

I suspect what you actually mean is deism: the non-interventionist "first cause".
(which is a useless and/or inadequately explored idea on its own, mind)

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  Being an atheist, I believe the pursuit of science would eventually unveil the existence of a god if he/she/it existed.

Any true atheist or logical thinker cannot deny the possibility of a god, and would certainly have to accept the existence of one if given evidence.

Define god.

It's incoherent to speak of "possibilities" when referring to undefined phenomena.

Also: where did you get from God to god? That's generally taken for a relevant distinction.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  Atheists and agnostics deny religion and don't focus too much on the possibility of a god, theists usually accept religion because they believe in the possibility of a god, or perhaps are convinced that there has to be a god.

That being said, I think it is inherently unavoidable to come upon the idea of a god or creator.

I don't really think so.

Imagine a world with no religion.
(I hear it's easy if you try).

The inhabitants of this world have roughly the same natural understanding as we do - so they don't know where the universe came from either. I'm sure they'd speculate.

Do you really think - if the meme had never existed for them - that any of them would take seriously the idea that the proximate cause (if such a thing can be coherently said to exist) of the observable universe was "some magic dude lol".

No, they'd have the same conclusion we do - that if a cause may be said to exist (dubious, given the physically contingent understanding of 'cause' we are using), then it... exists. That's it. By definition nothing further may be known. Any additional precept is some combination of blind assertion, special pleading, and cosmic narcissism.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  I propose that individuals join religions only because of they agree with that assumption: the existence of a god. Religions then manipulate that innocent belief to impose dogmas, rules, cultural constructs, ect.

Terminology, man, terminology!

Deism. Theism. They are different things.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  This is my proposal because because I do not necessarily see the idea of a belief of a god very destructive, but I do see the the belief systems of religion to be extremely destructive.

What do you guys think? I need some feed back to either correct this proposal or get rid of it entirely.

Er, see above.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  Do you think people join religions and follow them without question only because it agrees with the assumption of a higher intelligence?

Absolutely not.

The exact same cosmological arguments are used to "prove" every different religion, with no less fervour.

It's learned insofar as cultural background is a hilariously good predictor of which religion someone "decides" on. But starting from a vague deism does not get you anything remotely like major modern organised religions.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  (I hope I articulated this well enough.)
Also, that being said, I do reject the importance or existence of a god or higher intelligence. I'm not sure if that was clear. I just don't condemn the belief of a god, I condemn religion.

Sure. If all theists were deists, it would mean that for almost all intents and purposes what they believed wouldn't matter.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 10 users Like cjlr's post
16-04-2014, 12:30 PM
RE: The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy
If one has faith, what should there be to prove?

Faith is a commitment.

A person who does not have faith, doesn't have to prove anything.

_____________

One can stand on either side of that middle sentence.
Maybe you are having commitment issues, Elconquistador. Drinking Beverage

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2014, 12:39 PM
RE: The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy
It all seemed very sensible and stuff but you did slip one line inbetween all of it which seems to be the crux of your argument and which, if I was being unkind, may describe as a line you do not want to draw attention to.

Quote:That being said, I think it is inherently unavoidable to come upon the idea of a god or creator.

Could you elaborate on this please.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Mathilda's post
16-04-2014, 12:45 PM (This post was last modified: 16-04-2014 12:50 PM by Blackhand293.)
RE: The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy
(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  That being said, I think it is inherently unavoidable to come upon the idea of a god or creator.

Historically a creator is only brought in when other explanations have failed or are non-existent, it is not the de facto answer.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  I propose that individuals join religions only because of they agree with that assumption: the existence of a god. Religions then manipulate that innocent belief to impose dogmas, rules, cultural constructs, ect.

Often you have no choice, indoctrination into the cults starts at a young age, not because they inherently believe in a supreme causer.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  This is my proposal because because I do not necessarily see the idea of a belief of a god very destructive, but I do see the the belief systems of religion to be extremely destructive.

Unless you are a Deist as cjlr pointed out, the belief in a god goes hand in hand with a religion. With no belief in the god the religion is nothing but psycho-drama, and without he psycho-drama the god either has to be deistic or there is no need to worship the being.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  What do you guys think? I need some feed back to either correct this proposal or get rid of it entirely.

Do you think people join religions and follow them without question only because it agrees with the assumption of a higher intelligence?

(I hope I articulated this well enough.)
Also, that being said, I do reject the importance or existence of a god or higher intelligence. I'm not sure if that was clear. I just don't condemn the belief of a god, I condemn religion.

As stated earlier, on does not join a religion so much as you are indoctrinated to believe that their is some invisible, intangible, force out there. Remove the belief in god and religion withers to nothing more than pantomime

The requirement of evidence to back your claim does not disappear because it hurts your feelings, reality does not care about your feefees.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2014, 12:49 PM (This post was last modified: 16-04-2014 12:57 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy
I like your username 'cause your quest is quixotic. Tongue

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  4) Seeing that I am atheist, there are three relevant precepts to keep in mind of where I am coming from:
a) God is a made up superstition designed to help people cope with the idea of death and uncertainty

I think that's the untenable bullshit promise of a postmortem preservation of identity and eternal bliss (which feels like an oxymoron). God is just their Charon.

(16-04-2014 12:19 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Define god.

Exactly. If you take a Spinozistic interpretation as Einstein did and define God as the basic laws underlying existence then sure, don't think I got an issue with that.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  I am atheist, I very much dislike religion, but I don't dislike the idea of a God, a Divine Creator, and I do not discourage the pursuit of evidence of that creator. I don't think it's that crazy of an idea, I think religion is crazy (seeing as the mormon faith and surrounding christians really put a bad taste in my mouth and my mind does not allow my to believe in any sort of dogma without reason and logic.)

Being an atheist, I believe the pursuit of science would eventually unveil the existence of a god if he/she/it existed.

Under Spinozism, that's exactly what cljr and the rest of the physicists are doing one piece at a time. They are the priests of the temple. ... shit that's I reference I need to ground.




#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2014, 12:59 PM
RE: The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy
(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  So before I start I just want to make a couple things clear:



1) I'm atheist
2) I understand that many of you guys will disagree with me so please reply so I can have a better perspective
3) This is just a general idea, not even worthy to be called a hypothesis or theory
4) Seeing that I am atheist, there are three relevant precepts to keep in mind of where I am coming from:
a) God is a made up superstition designed to help people cope with the idea of death and uncertainty
b) religion seeks to control people by using false book such as the BOM, Bible, Quran, Tora, ect.
c) There is no verifiable, quantifiable, observable, empirical evidence to support any current theories of a God, Savior, or One True Religion.


That being said, I may now actually say something that will surprise some people:


I am atheist, I very much dislike religion, but I don't dislike the idea of a God, a Divine Creator, and I do not discourage the pursuit of evidence of that creator. I don't think it's that crazy of an idea, I think religion is crazy (seeing as the mormon faith and surrounding christians really put a bad taste in my mouth and my mind does not allow my to believe in any sort of dogma without reason and logic.)


Being an atheist, I believe the pursuit of science would eventually unveil the existence of a god if he/she/it existed.


Any true atheist or logical thinker cannot deny the possibility of a god, and would certainly have to accept the existence of one if given evidence.


Atheists and agnostics deny religion and don't focus too much on the possibility of a god, theists usually accept religion because they believe in the possibility of a god, or perhaps are convinced that there has to be a god.


That being said, I think it is inherently unavoidable to come upon the idea of a god or creator.


I propose that individuals join religions only because of they agree with that assumption: the existence of a god. Religions then manipulate that innocent belief to impose dogmas, rules, cultural constructs, ect.


This is my proposal because because I do not necessarily see the idea of a belief of a god very destructive, but I do see the the belief systems of religion to be extremely destructive.


What do you guys think? I need some feed back to either correct this proposal or get rid of it entirely.


Do you think people join religions and follow them without question only because it agrees with the assumption of a higher intelligence?


(I hope I articulated this well enough.)
Also, that being said, I do reject the importance or existence of a god or higher intelligence. I'm not sure if that was clear. I just don't condemn the belief of a god, I condemn religion.
Assuming we're talking about deism here, I pretty much agree that one cannot completely deny the possibility. That is, it would take a pretty stupid person to say that, if a god stood before them they would still deny that it exists. I do, however, believe that one can say something along the lines of "I'm reasonably certain no deity exists" because really, if a being powerful enough to create the universe really did exist, how likely is it that we wouldn't know something of it? And I mean know, not "I see the universe, it's awesome, so a deity must have created it" which is just a guess. It seems extremely likely there would be some evidence if a deity exists and, since there presently is none, I do hold to that kind of thinking myself that I'm reasonably certain no deity exists.

Do I think people join religions due to an assumption that a deity exists? No. It may be true for a very few, but I think originally (centuries ago) people joined religions out of fear and a need to explain things they didn't understand. After that, people were born into religious families and taught to believe, but also had the same fear and need to explain things. Eventually, when we got closer to current times, the primary factors probably became being born into those families, being indoctrinated, and also fear of death. Emotional needs would play in there too - for example seeking comfort through prayer during difficult times. I honestly think the assumption of a deity (which I take to mean something more natural or innate as opposed to learned) wouldn't factor in much if at all.

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Impulse's post
16-04-2014, 01:00 PM
RE: The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy
(16-04-2014 12:19 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  So before I start I just want to make a couple things clear:

1) I'm atheist
2) I understand that many of you guys will disagree with me so please reply so I can have a better perspective
3) This is just a general idea, not even worthy to be called a hypothesis or theory
4) Seeing that I am atheist, there are three relevant precepts to keep in mind of where I am coming from:
a) God is a made up superstition designed to help people cope with the idea of death and uncertainty
b) religion seeks to control people by using false book such as the BOM, Bible, Quran, Tora, ect.
c) There is no verifiable, quantifiable, observable, empirical evidence to support any current theories of a God, Savior, or One True Religion.

That being said, I may now actually say something that will surprise some people:

I am atheist, I very much dislike religion, but I don't dislike the idea of a God, a Divine Creator, and I do not discourage the pursuit of evidence of that creator. I don't think it's that crazy of an idea, I think religion is crazy (seeing as the mormon faith and surrounding christians really put a bad taste in my mouth and my mind does not allow my to believe in any sort of dogma without reason and logic.)

You need to clear up your terminology. You literally said "God is a made up superstition" and then literally said you don't dislike the idea [of a made up superstition].

If you're calling possible the same thing you just called made up then you're being rather inconsistent (and incoherent!).

I suspect what you actually mean is deism: the non-interventionist "first cause".
(which is a useless and/or inadequately explored idea on its own, mind)

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  Being an atheist, I believe the pursuit of science would eventually unveil the existence of a god if he/she/it existed.

Any true atheist or logical thinker cannot deny the possibility of a god, and would certainly have to accept the existence of one if given evidence.

Define god.

It's incoherent to speak of "possibilities" when referring to undefined phenomena.

Also: where did you get from God to god? That's generally taken for a relevant distinction.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  Atheists and agnostics deny religion and don't focus too much on the possibility of a god, theists usually accept religion because they believe in the possibility of a god, or perhaps are convinced that there has to be a god.

That being said, I think it is inherently unavoidable to come upon the idea of a god or creator.

I don't really think so.

Imagine a world with no religion.
(I hear it's easy if you try).

The inhabitants of this world have roughly the same natural understanding as we do - so they don't know where the universe came from either. I'm sure they'd speculate.

Do you really think - if the meme had never existed for them - that any of them would take seriously the idea that the proximate cause (if such a thing can be coherently said to exist) of the observable universe was "some magic dude lol".

No, they'd have the same conclusion we do - that if a cause may be said to exist (dubious, given the physically contingent understanding of 'cause' we are using), then it... exists. That's it. By definition nothing further may be known. Any additional precept is some combination of blind assertion, special pleading, and cosmic narcissism.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  I propose that individuals join religions only because of they agree with that assumption: the existence of a god. Religions then manipulate that innocent belief to impose dogmas, rules, cultural constructs, ect.

Terminology, man, terminology!

Deism. Theism. They are different things.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  This is my proposal because because I do not necessarily see the idea of a belief of a god very destructive, but I do see the the belief systems of religion to be extremely destructive.

What do you guys think? I need some feed back to either correct this proposal or get rid of it entirely.

Er, see above.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  Do you think people join religions and follow them without question only because it agrees with the assumption of a higher intelligence?

Absolutely not.

The exact same cosmological arguments are used to "prove" every different religion, with no less fervour.

It's learned insofar as cultural background is a hilariously good predictor of which religion someone "decides" on. But starting from a vague deism does not get you anything remotely like major modern organised religions.

(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  (I hope I articulated this well enough.)
Also, that being said, I do reject the importance or existence of a god or higher intelligence. I'm not sure if that was clear. I just don't condemn the belief of a god, I condemn religion.

Sure. If all theists were deists, it would mean that for almost all intents and purposes what they believed wouldn't matter.

Thank you so much for taking the time to analyze my idea.

Like I said, it was just an idea, nothing near hypothesis or theory. Just something that's been on my mind.

Yes, I used theism and deism enter changeably because they both imply the same thing in common: a cause. But I agree, I have a little incoherent, but I don't think the semantics is really relevant, the implication of both are the same.

But anyways, after reading this and recieving comments on another forum my idea is completely void and mute, or rather, irrelevant now. I retract my idea.

"A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be."- Albert Einstein.

"We are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star. But we can understand the Universe. That makes us something very special." Steven Hawking
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like elconquistador's post
16-04-2014, 01:04 PM
RE: The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy
(16-04-2014 12:59 PM)Impulse Wrote:  
(16-04-2014 12:01 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  So before I start I just want to make a couple things clear:



1) I'm atheist
2) I understand that many of you guys will disagree with me so please reply so I can have a better perspective
3) This is just a general idea, not even worthy to be called a hypothesis or theory
4) Seeing that I am atheist, there are three relevant precepts to keep in mind of where I am coming from:
a) God is a made up superstition designed to help people cope with the idea of death and uncertainty
b) religion seeks to control people by using false book such as the BOM, Bible, Quran, Tora, ect.
c) There is no verifiable, quantifiable, observable, empirical evidence to support any current theories of a God, Savior, or One True Religion.


That being said, I may now actually say something that will surprise some people:


I am atheist, I very much dislike religion, but I don't dislike the idea of a God, a Divine Creator, and I do not discourage the pursuit of evidence of that creator. I don't think it's that crazy of an idea, I think religion is crazy (seeing as the mormon faith and surrounding christians really put a bad taste in my mouth and my mind does not allow my to believe in any sort of dogma without reason and logic.)


Being an atheist, I believe the pursuit of science would eventually unveil the existence of a god if he/she/it existed.


Any true atheist or logical thinker cannot deny the possibility of a god, and would certainly have to accept the existence of one if given evidence.


Atheists and agnostics deny religion and don't focus too much on the possibility of a god, theists usually accept religion because they believe in the possibility of a god, or perhaps are convinced that there has to be a god.


That being said, I think it is inherently unavoidable to come upon the idea of a god or creator.


I propose that individuals join religions only because of they agree with that assumption: the existence of a god. Religions then manipulate that innocent belief to impose dogmas, rules, cultural constructs, ect.


This is my proposal because because I do not necessarily see the idea of a belief of a god very destructive, but I do see the the belief systems of religion to be extremely destructive.


What do you guys think? I need some feed back to either correct this proposal or get rid of it entirely.


Do you think people join religions and follow them without question only because it agrees with the assumption of a higher intelligence?


(I hope I articulated this well enough.)
Also, that being said, I do reject the importance or existence of a god or higher intelligence. I'm not sure if that was clear. I just don't condemn the belief of a god, I condemn religion.
Assuming we're talking about deism here, I pretty much agree that one cannot completely deny the possibility. That is, it would take a pretty stupid person to say that, if a god stood before them they would still deny that it exists. I do, however, believe that one can say something along the lines of "I'm reasonably certain no deity exists" because really, if a being powerful enough to create the universe really did exist, how likely is it that we wouldn't know something of it? And I mean know, not "I see the universe, it's awesome, so a deity must have created it" which is just a guess. It seems extremely likely there would be some evidence if a deity exists and, since there presently is none, I do hold to that kind of thinking myself that I'm reasonably certain no deity exists.

Do I think people join religions due to an assumption that a deity exists? No. It may be true for a very few, but I think originally (centuries ago) people joined religions out of fear and a need to explain things they didn't understand. After that, people were born into religious families and taught to believe, but also had the same fear and need to explain things. Eventually, when we got closer to current times, the primary factors probably became being born into those families, being indoctrinated, and also fear of death. Emotional needs would play in there too - for example seeking comfort through prayer during difficult times. I honestly think the assumption of a deity (which I take to mean something more natural or innate as opposed to learned) wouldn't factor in much if at all.

I see, I would have to agree with you. Thank you so much for you input. I really, really appreciate it. Smile

"A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be."- Albert Einstein.

"We are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star. But we can understand the Universe. That makes us something very special." Steven Hawking
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like elconquistador's post
16-04-2014, 01:07 PM
RE: The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy
(16-04-2014 01:00 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  Yes, I used theism and deism enter changeably because they both imply the same thing in common: a cause.
*interchangeably

(16-04-2014 01:00 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  But anyways, after reading this and recieving comments on another forum my idea is completely void and mute, or rather, irrelevant now.
*receiving

(16-04-2014 01:04 PM)elconquistador Wrote:  Thank you so much for you input.
*your

[Image: 0t82Piy.png]

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: