That's the nice thing about these threads. Anyone can post and you never know who is going to add their own opinions!

Truthful

I think it is important - essential, even - for believers to justify their belief by telling everyone else - even 'shouting' at them in capital letters - that what they believe is in some way 'correct' and that all the learned theologians of other faiths have got it all wrong, mistranslating the original text when showing what it meant in modern English.

Of course it could be that there is no such thing as a god. That would be a really good explanation about why, for example, people argue about the Trinity, believed in by all Christians as it is a part of that belief, but doubted by a few people who consider themselves as having more intellect than the expert theologians among Christians. How arrogant!

If there was a god, all the believers would believe the same thing, with only very minor variations between them. As my quote says, why bother to argue? If you're sure your own particular interpretation is correct and equally sure that everyone who disagrees with you is just 'wrong'- does it matter? Best to just go fishing!

mmmmmmmmmmmmmm

wonderful

no

I would go along with that 'alien' idea, can't wait for us to 'discover' them. Imagine what the religious nutters would have to say about that! A friend once suggested that we might be on this planet (and others?) like rats in a cage during an experiment.

We might indeed!

Thank you both. The best answer seems to be a spirit that can exist in any form.

But I still have difficulty in understanding how anyone can have such a strong faith and belief in something so vague.

As you say, JBH, some people writing to this thread could use critical thinking - but most likely won't bother!

But can you tell me something, please? What exactly is this God you believe in? Some sort of plasma, floating in space? Another human being, on this planet - or on another planet? Nobody seems capable of answering that question, and yet believers don't seem to think it matters! Believers are full of what God will do, does do, doesn't do, won't do, and more. But nowhere can I find a simple explanation of what God actually IS!

It's difficult to have a discussion about something that nobody can define!

Is there any evidence to prove creationism is wrong? There are a number of problems with answering this question. Firstly, when making any statement it is important to acknowledge what is known as the burden of proof. It is the responsibility of the person making such a statement to prove that it is true to begin with before a sensible counter argument can be made. Since there is no evidence (experimental, observational or otherwise) for creationism, the burden lies with those who believe this to be true to prove it is so. If we do not follow this general rule (most people do this without even realising in day to day life) you imply that the question or statement is always correct to begin with. Without wanting to trivialise the problem but taking this to an extreme example, if I state that the centre of the Sun if filled with strawberry jelly you would not believe me and would expect me to provide you with evidence. This is acceptable as I bear the burden of proof; however, if we extend the creationism argument that science must prove it is not true, it is now your responsibility to prove that the strawberry jelly does not exist. This is clearly not a sensible way of working and creationism (or religion is general) is one of the very few areas in the modern world that people insist the burden of proof lies with the person answering the question.

Even putting this aside, there is very strong evidence for the theory of evolution with which nearly all of the scientific community agrees upon. With the advances in areas of science such a genetics it is almost impossible, even without the burden of proof, to suggest that humans were created as we are today without simply ignoring all of the scientific evidence to support it.

source: http://www.askanastronomer.co.uk/thebigbangandcreationism.php

The Big Bang theory is treated as though it's an unassailable scientific truth: 13.8 billion years ago, the Universe as we know it emerged from a hot, dense state known as the Big Bang. While there were a number of serious alternatives considered for decades, throughout the 20th century, a scientific consensus emerged more than 50 years ago with the discovery of the Cosmic Microwave Background. Despite many attempts to revive a variety of the discredited ideas, as well as attempts to formulate new possibilities, all have fallen away under the burden of the full suite of astronomical data. The Big Bang reigns supreme as the only valid theory of our cosmic origins.

Scientists don't believe in the Big Bang; they conclude it based on the full suite of observations. The last adherents to the ancient, discredited alternatives are at last dying away. The Big Bang is no longer a revolutionary endpoint of the scientific enterprise; it's the solid foundation we build upon. Its predictive successes have been overwhelming, and no alternative has yet stepped up to the challenge of matching its scientific accuracy in describing the Universe.


source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/09/04/this-is-why-there-are-no-alternatives-to-the-big-bang/

Agreed. When I die all that will be left of me is the memories of family and friends. Same for you and other other creatures on this planet. There's no harm in misguided belief, it is just such a waste of time and effort!

I've not yet seen any mathematical proof that evolution is 'wrong' the only people I've met who make that claim are the JWs who knock at my door with their copy of 'The Watchtower'. Their own 'scientists' all agree that evolution is wrong - because their bible tells them it is wrong! What a daft reason for a 'belief'!!!

A belief is not what someone else tells you, it comes from within and is probably the summation of all the things you've heard, from family and friends, on the radio, in the pub, and anywhere else. Strange that my family are/were all Christians and my school was Catholic. None of that had any influence on my beliefs. I guess I worked it out for myself.

At last it seems we are getting some answers.

First you believe that someone a couple of thousand years ago was crucified. As were many others at that time, since it was the standard method of punishment. They would chop your hand off if you stole a sheep!

Second you believe that this particular person somehow 'rose again from the dead' as it says in various books, mostly written by ancient greek historians (the other books I guess are wrong).

Next, you believe in the achievements of science, except those that don't match with your own ideas, namely the evolution concept. If we didn't evolve, where did we come from? Ah, I get it, you have a belief similar to that of the JWs who think the earth was made about six thousand years ago, following a biblical calculation. You've said before you believe that calculation to be in error, so although your belief is similar, you would disagree with the six thousand years old figure.

The JWs have an answer for everything. If you ask them about fossils they will tell you that god put the fossils in the ground to be there for us. Can't imagine why she would do that, but of course they don't know 'why' she did that. Why would god want to confuse us into thinking that the fossils are proof that the age of the earth is greater than their figure of six thousand years? They can't answer that.

Sounds like your reasoning is similar. Like them, you have a belief that starts off by saying, "This is what I believe" and then where the scientific observations of facts don't agree with your stated belief, you bend them into something that will fit. The JWs do the same thing! Why do that? Why not accept that your starting point is quite simply wrong? Why not revise your theory to match the known facts? Your continual struggle to make the point, complete with the stupid use of boldface, capitals and italics is so unnecessary! In the early days of computing, the use of capitals was considered to be shouting. Are you shouting at other contributors? Does that make your point clearer? It's just annoying!

The very worst scientists are those who have a theory and then conveniently ignore other observations that might suggest their ideas are wrong, while making much of those theories that might suggest their theory is right. As I've said before, the best scientists try as hard as they can to disprove their theories. Only when they fail to do that will they consider that maybe, just maybe, their theory might be right.

I must check out the beliefs of those scientists who believe in god. Somehow I think they will also believe in evolution - but I'll get back to this thread with some quotes if I can find any. Not sure how you will handle believers who accept evolution. It is quite possible to believe in god while accepting the theory of evolution. Yes, there are gaps in our knowledge, but have you noticed how every few years another fossil is discovered that closes one of those gaps? Soon the theory will be complete, but I guess some people still will not accept it.

Evolution is accepted by everyone I know and have ever known since school days. That is how we are here. Even the Catholic school I attended taught evolution and that was in the 1960s before many of those gaps had been filled. The only people I have ever found who not accept evolution is those JWs, again. So I wonder if you feel that god put human people on this planet and despite the well known bad effects of inter-breeding, expected us humans to breed among ourselves until we reached the point today when there are about nine billion of us on this planet.

I asky myself, why choose a 'belief' that in some ways flys in the face of known facts? What is the point of that? And why go into all that detailed argument about which writings in which books are the 'true' ones and which are (for some reason) 'false' writings? I suppose to back up your belief theory. After all, if one says X and another says Y then you will pick the one that confirms your belief and then try to convince people about thr rightness of one book, or translation, and the implied 'wrongness' of another.

Why the continued need to provide 'testimony'? If what you believe in was agreed by all, there would be no need to do that. I guess you know that most people disagree with you, so you provide all these stories about your past as your 'testimony'. Curiously, nothing like that has ever happened to me. I don't need any testimony to try to prove something I believe in that others might not believe in. It is quite unnecessary!

I don't disbelieve that there have been several charismatic leaders of people in human history, including one who might have been crucified, as many others were at that time. Sounds barbaric to us these days, but there are still countries where you can be strapped into a chair and deliberately killed by poison or electricity. We still do the same thing, but just do it in a more modern way.

As a humanist, I am appalled that in this 21st century some people on this planet still deliberately take the lives of others. I am a pacifist and would never do such a thing, it is horrendous. Yet Christians sometimes wear a cross around their necks to remind them that their leader was put to death. Many women wear a cross as jewellery, perhaps forgetting what it means to their religion. Others believe that the bread and wine offered in their services become the actual body and blood of the man who was crucified! Yes, that's true, I was brought up a Catholic and know all about what those poor misguided people are told to believe. I feel sorry for them.

For me, belief comes from within. It is not something you can be told to do by someone else. It 'just is'. Coming from within, I try to treat others as I would like them to treat me. Fortunately the death penalty is banned in my country, the UK. If not I'm sure I would be among those petitioning those in power to ban it.

I find that JWs and others with similar beliefs are deluded into believing in some magic being. If god is all powerful (as I was taught at school) is it possible for her to make a rock so heavy that she can't lift it? That is one of many conundrums which of course can't be answered, suggesting to me that it isn't actually possible for any being to be all powerful. Does it matter? Is it important that your god is all powerful? Is it important that your god loves every single human, regardless of whether we love her and 'obey' her in return? It is anathema to me to be told that I have to obey some rules, made up by men, in the name of some imaginary being! No thank you, sir, I follow my own internal moral guide. Nothing to do with being a humanist, I only every heard of humanists a few years ago and suddenly realised that I am one, and have been for a long time!

I don't need any 'testimony' and frankly have no idea how the amzing things that happened to you could have happened. Others have put forward possibilities which of course you have denied. It doesn't matter to me what happened. All I know is what you believe happened. I suspect the real truth was quite different to what you believe. No need to argue the point because your belief is solid and you're not open to other explanations. If any of those things happened to me, I would be looking for explanations that most certainly do not include some imaginary being. That's a getout for you because you don't want to consider the truth of what actually did happen in reality. You pass the buck if you don't understand something and just blame it on god. A scientist will puzzle over the various possibilities and if nothing fits will say that the happening is beyond our current knowledge to explain. One day, we will have the answer. But likely long after I'm gone, sad to say. Seems you can't accept that, everything has to be explained today and god is a pretty good scapegoat, 'cos she can't answer your claims!

I have never tried to classify your belief as anything because I have never understood anything you have said.



To help me figure it out, I would really like a simple explanation of what it is you actually believe - but without all the complicated wording you have used in your past contributions. Your words are like a butterfly, jumping about from one thing to another with no apparent connection between them.



No, I don't think so. Having a partner to live with is totally different from living on your own!



Very kind of you to call me intelligent and intellectually smart. That is very different from what you said in your ealier posts. In one of them, you were so rude as to call me a liar. What did I say to change your mind about me? I'm still the same person and still know for sure that you are a deluded religious nutter!

It is really nice to read a clear and simple opinion on this thread. I agree with almost all of the above. Not sure I completely agree with using the idea of a god to explain some things, like the beginning of the universe. That's getting dangerously close to the deluded nutters posting such complicated rubbish on here. They use that idea to explain everything for which they cannot see a correct explanation. It's a bit like blaming thunderstorms on an angry god, as they did long before thunderstorms were understood. Now that science has advanced to the point where we can provide a clear and simple explanation for such phenomena, nobody believes in a god who has been upset by something that a human has said or done.

In the future, I am confident that scientific advances will explain all of those things that currently puzzle us. The difference between me and the nutters is that I am happy to wait for science to explain everything, only I won't live long enough to find out all the answers, boo hoo! The nutters are just lazy people who use the god excuse for anything that happens which is beyond their understanding. They just don't realise that science today cannot answer everything. It probably never will, but as time goes by we will learn more about our planet and everything on it, including us.

I am happy to wait. The lazy ones are deluded into thinking there is a simple answer - it's all god. I do find it quite amusing at how earnestly each of the different religions argues, "We're the true religion, all others are false!". That itself is enough to prove to me there cannot be a god. If there was, not only would the believers all be in total agreement about what this god is, but we would all know about her and would all be in agreement with each other. Threads like this one
just could not exist under those conditions!

Sometimes I wish someone could explain in simple terms exactly what god really is. Answers to that question are invariably couched in terms of what god does, or can do, or will do, or might do. What god is like (all knowing, all loving, etc) and so on. But never has anyone explained what god actually is. Of course that could just be because there is no god, so everyone would be guessing!

I'm sure you're right, Tom. The mind is not yet understood very well. When people know a lot more about it, these manifestations will be explained. We already know about psychotic drugs and that people have weird experiences when taking them. I think people primed to believe in imaginary deities, for which there is no 'concrete' proof, will be able to invent that proof in a very convincing way and actually believe that what they 'saw' was a proof of what they believe. When these delusions have all been explained away we will no doubt be left with a small group of people who deny the science, even when their visions are easily explained. That's the problem with these things - they look so 'real' that it will be very difficult to explain to them that in fact they are delusions. At least I'm not among the delusioned!