Unscientific survey of 'poly religious beliefs

[Q Classic]

I'm Catholic, at least by birth and raising. God's supposed to be everywhere, but honestly, I have a hard time seeing it. Besides, I'm not sure if I like him and if he's even as great (decent) or Great (powerful) as the Good Book says.

Bad things happen to good people. Things like shawnmmc's witness, or the homeless on the streets, and hell, even the tsunamis ( an aside: if you can't laugh at the tsunami, what can you laugh at? you have to laugh at hell, otherwise the horror that is the world will get to you. ) truly make me doubt if God in all his glory actually gives a ****. If Evil is allowed to punish evildoers, why does it all to often hit those who aren't... bad? Unless, Brent, you wish to argue that Shawn's really, in his heart of hearts, a low-down dirty nogoodnik.

Why do the good, the blessed have to suffer? Is it to teach them a lesson? I'd think most people would learn their lesson after maybe a year or two of excruciating hell on earth... so why must their homelessness continue? Why would people spared the terrible death of the tsunami be blessed with the scourge of cholera? Is it payment for the Great Beyond? Do I have to sacrifice joy here to have... well, notMisery in Heaven?

And what is with the Book of Job? What am I supposed to take away from that? That we will be blessed by having unshakeable faith in a deity that makes a gamey bet with his counterpart with... everything we had returned to us? As Mirage says in The Incredibles, "Next time, bet your own life." Besides, if I want a bull**** moral like that, I'll watch the crapfest that's Miracle on 34th Street where the little girl learns that Santa Does Exist because she gets Her Stuff. I just can't buy that a wonderful, just, and loving God would allow **** like this to happen.

So no, he and I aren't exactly on talking terms.

I'm not a nihilist, not a Daoist, and not even existentialist, no matter what my posts sometimes sound like. Sure, nothing we do now really matters. Everything done is meaningless, an exercise in futility. So what? In nothing, there's potential. So do it anyway. God, if he's out there, doesn't give a **** about you. So what? Be nice to people anyway.

The real shame here is that at one point, I desperately wanted to believe what I'd been taught. I wish I had my mother's faith--it seems to have given her resources that I've never imagined anyone to have. But every prayer of hers that goes unanswered, every miserable thing that happens to her along the way... well, makes me like God less. She loves him--heck, she considered being part of the Sisterhood, once.

I'd like to think that most people here have good friends and family they'd go to the mat for. If they saw one of their friends in a bad spot, as in if the object of their affection consistently ignored them and maked life difficult for them, they'd take them aside and say, "He doesn't deserve you, you know."

Problem is, it's hard to tell your mom that the one she's been praying to all this time... doesn't seem to give a **** about her. It's hard to believe that the one you've been taught has the whole world in his hands, the one who's supposed to have a plan for you, the one who's supposed to make the world better for you if you only had faith... might not. Because he's playing racquetball with this world, doesn't seem to have a plan for me, and hasn't rewarded those who have unshakeable faith.

[child of Thor]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/godonbrain.shtml

I'm still trying to find info about that current leading british scientist(with a huge IQ) that has through his understanding of science, come to believe in a creator.

Edit: found him. Sir Martin Rees. just some stuff about other universes etc http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/s...tin_rees.shtml .

But he now has found that science has lead him to 'God' if you like, so he has proven to himself that god exists apparently. I'll see if i can find the specifics, but a web search on his name would probably come up with it.

Got it exactly now, this was the series i watched on tv and it was very interesting:

http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/W/what_we_still_dont_know/

try the 'Are we real' section then 'too fine tuned for chance'.

[Mr. Harley]

My Deism - with the expectation of ceasing to exist after my death brings me no joy. If there is an afterlife, but the essence that outlives me does not have my memories - I have ceased to exist. My memories, and my choices, all go into making me who I am.

I am letting my wife bring our little girl up Jewish - fortunately it's matrilineal, so it's all kosher (bad pun). I have considered joining an Episcopal or Orthodox (Christian type) congregation to share my heritage, and the music with her (I sang on a choir from the age of 10 till I was 22 and it's the only way I can feel any spiritual connection) but I hesitate, because hippocracy has always bothered me. Understand - I believe in a God, I just don't think he cares.

I would do this because believing in termination, that there is no hereafter or at least you do not survive the change, is the last thing I want to bequeath my little girl. On the other hand, I don't want her raised to be one of the people who believes in God bailing them out, and that they can do bad things because all they have to do is ask God to forgive them, or proclaim they believe in Christ and are saved. Both are distressingly common in this area, which is Baptist and Catholic.

Plus, in the final analysis, I really, REALLY hope I am wrong.

[Bill3000]

Originally posted by child of Thor


can we test this? it might be fun

Anyway if you have a real religious belief, doesn't IQ becomes over rated?

I wonder if there is a pattern between IQ rateing and religious belief? Then again isn't the IQ test much to do with abstract thought process - although 'God' is a pretty abstract thought?

...wow. Just... wow. I can't believe you actually seriously replied to that. The entire phrase "___ lowers my IQ just by reading it" is a joke meaning that the entire argument on both sides is just plain stupid and dumb. But if you really want to go for it...

IQ isn't a real measure of intelligence. It's a measure of how one can cormpare academically to other people; this is certainatly not intelligence. A simple refution of the concept of IQ = intelligence is by showing that there can be people who are geniuses, yet can be incredibly crappy on written tests.

Though if you would take it for what it is, the IQ VS religious beliefs would be lopsided towards the agnostic/atheist side, or at least towards the non-organized religious side, because those who higher IQs tend to think for themselves, rather than believe in the dogma of an organized religion. But then again, IQ isn't a measure of intelligence, so this isn't a good comparation. Heck, I don't even know what I even said this.

Even if the concept of god is something made up, it's something integral to humanity. The concept of faith is one that has kept us motivated and given us hope for our entire existance. The desire to find out the ultimate truth of the universe is catalyzed by the desire to find a creator of the universe; however, if the truth is different, that doesn't make it futile. There is plenty of beauty within the Laws of Nature itself, that we can consider THAT to be what we would consider "god" - thus, worshiping god would just be celebrating existance. Heck, if one wants to truly understand the entire universe, he would have to strip of himself ALL of his humanity, because humanity has biases which can only harm research; as an example, think of the counter-intuitiveness of quantum mechanics. If we weren't human (e.g., didn't have classical mechanical biases), it would be a lot easier to qualitatively understand quantum mechanics.

[child of Thor]

well i was a little bored (as my collecting of thread links above kinda proves), and it did make me wonder if high IQ = no religion.

I agree that people who follow, may be less inclined to think for themselves. Simple monkey hearding behaviour(but fine as that is where are roots are).

Still i was kind of interested that a prominant scientist(and aethisit) found that through his many years of scientific study he may have found a 'God' type scenario, which surprised him as much as anyone.

[Bill3000]

The concept of an atheist will eventually be a hard position as we understand more of existance. IMO it really is just how much one puts a value on nature. Those who completely appreciate all of what the laws of nature do, could be considered practically deist. I believe that the majority of scientists are deist in some sense, anyway. The confusion comes in the fact that they don't want to relate the deist belief in nature with the theist belief in religion. Is it possible that there is a god that is exactly like what christianity or other major religions say? Probably not. Is it possible that they could have one part of the truth of nature? Maybe, but that's impossible to know.

Bah. Ultimately it's all a matter of moral relativity; all religions are on the sense grounds when it comes to reality. The only way that a religion has more "power" over another is in the number of followers that religion has, and that isn't a real way to measure the "superiority" of a religion. Human faith is something that's pretty danged integral to human nature; one can still have some sort of faith without believing in the concept of a literal theistic god.

[Brent]

I do not believe in premeditated repentance. Proclaiming to believe in Christ is certainly not enough. One must truly believe, and if one does, one will act on it. Repentance involves restitution. It is difficult to obtain forgiveness if one planned to be forgiven and did something one knew was wrong anyway. True Remorse is required, which premeditation makes difficult.

The Glory of God is Intelligence.

One should not become a member of a religion without first thinking for themselves about it.

Humanity is the central creation of the universe.

One should ideally follow God moreso than following any fellow mortal.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Its a word game, based on a particular view of what omnipotent means. Jewish mysticism doesnt see G-d as omnipotent in quite that way - in order to do things a certain way (create the world) certain other things HAD to happen - certain imperfections in the universe had to take place - our goal is through spiritual practices to repair the world, and eliminate those imperfections. Yet we still use words like "omnipotent" - just as we speak of God's hand, yet we dont expect Him to, say, need to clip his fingernails. Its a metaphor, to reach human understanding. Some metaphors that were needed in 500 BC we dont need anymore - some we still do need as an aid to reflection - but these metaphors must be seen as such, as symbols, as poetry. You can no more logic chop a faith of this kind than you can poetry - yet, like poetry, this still is a mechanism for struggling with truth - a different way than logic - (which is not to say you cant ALSO use logic in conjunction, just as you can with poetry - but not ALL of the teaching of religion is accesible to logic, just as not all of poetry is) Ordinary religionists, like their secular opponents, get caught up in the literal meanings of the symbols - mystics often use weird, unfamiliar symbols to break us out of these cliched ways to thinking. Some mystics aspire to get beyond symbols - Im not sure if they ever succeed.

Oh, so now we are saying that the concept of God being utter crap is now a failing in human understanding? See, continually twisting the facts to fit the story...your type have no credibility remaining...if your 'faith' is not open to any type of scrutiny or logic then it is utter nonsense, plain and simple. You cannot continue to make up the rules of the argument as you go along...

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Alternatively, you could ask - how could G-d NOT commit suicide after Auschwitz? How could He live with Himself?With his creation? With the humiliation in front of His people, and all mankind? Perhaps we was DOOMED to eternal life. Perhaps he is suffering. Perhaps THIS is the divine suffering in which redemption can be found (sorry, Ben). And if we rush to say (as most will, I suspect) that this is absurd, what does THIS tell us about our categories, and our faith?

Note - I mainly have questions, and few answers.

The questions revolve around a bullsh*t fairytale and you are barking up the wrong tree completely.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Brent
Humanity is the central creation of the universe.

This perception will be undoubtedly be proven false as we begin to explore things outside of our planet. People once believed the Earth itself was at the center of the universe. That notion was proven false. So shall be yours.

[Whaleboy]

Talking about perceived paradoxes makes little sense.

No, *that* makes little sense. Demonstrating paradoxes is a useful way to hole an argument.

Faith and logic have nothing to do with eachother. You can't deduce your way to a deeper understanding of spiritual matters.

They have plenty to do with each other in a dualistic sense. To a given end, one is inversely proportional to the other... if one has a great faith in something then it undermines the basis for reason, and vice versa. (I emphasise that this is to a given end, it does not say that a high capacity for one definitely means a low capacity for the other... I'd say there's just a correleation to that).

God cannot be both good and capable of doing evil at the same time.

Then he cannot be omnipotent.

Ultimate religious truth is the ultimate science. If we knew everything now we'd see no point in acting.

There is a difference between scientific method, a recepticle that is filling as we advance with scientific knowledge. That we do not know everything is granted, but we are perfectly able to make logical inferences if one assumes that logic predicates a given phenomenon.

Still, it was a wrong to force you to continue in chedar when you so much didnt want to be there, I think. I say this as someone whos daughter loves religious school, when it isnt ruined by some kid who's grumpy cause they dont want to have to anything to do with the thing, and the parents made them anyway. Let the ones who dont want to be there not be there, and make it that much better for those who DO want to be there.

You're right, and I was a git about it all... five years on I would probably handle things differently now, but the problem with the Jewish community in my experience is this preoccupation with falling numbers as my generation leaves the flock through atheism/secularism and intermarriage (religious Jewish man + non Jewish woman having a kid, the kid is not Jewish). The number of youth-oriented indoctrination ideas floating around is ridiculous. Just after my BM I had to go on this two week cherade of happy-clappy "everything is wonderful" outing run by ULPSNYC called "Kadimah" which means "forward" if I'm correct. This kind of community-oriented ostentacious bull**** is typical of the progressive Jewish community, whereas the Orthodox community tends to feel more secure and less evangelical .

Originally posted by Lord Nuclear


You know, coming from a person like you, this means nothing.

They said it was biologically impossible... they said it was morally wrong... hell they even said it would herald the apocalypse but there it is!: Fez had a baby!

So we define omnipotence as still subject to logic.

That's my problem with discussions on omnipotence but no-one's brought it up just yet. An excellent treatment of the problems surrounding God and omnipotence if one ignores my objection in that case I find it lends more credence to fideism... but then coming at it from an atheistic point of view may be different from those reading from a theistic, so POV's are always good!

Note - I mainly have questions, and few answers.

The best way to be... keeps your mind fresh and generally you may not answer those questions but you'll discover a lot of interesting stuff along the way.

Maybe no one would still believe in God if He didn't exist?

People believed in a flat earth for millenia, that says nothing about the proposition itself since it's a form of truth by popularity. Turn your question around and you'll have something interesting... would God exist by definition if no-one believed in him?

No being can ultimately cease to exist. Death applies only to mortality.

Define being?

All things are possible, but only through the most natural possible means. Omnipotence could be said to be relative. People need simple explanations before they can handle complete ones.

Evil is allowed in order to justify the punishment of evildoers. Evil does grieve God.

I gotta tell you that none of that makes any sense. You're not stating an argument, you're just stating unfounded tautologies that seem inconsistent. I'm sure you've put a lot of thought and soul-searching into it which I respect but all of that presumes God, and does not conclude it. As a result you're ending up with circular reasoning here.

I'd like to think that most people here have good friends and family they'd go to the mat for. If they saw one of their friends in a bad spot, as in if the object of their affection consistently ignored them and maked life difficult for them, they'd take them aside and say, "He doesn't deserve you, you know."

Problem is, it's hard to tell your mom that the one she's been praying to all this time... doesn't seem to give a **** about her. It's hard to believe that the one you've been taught has the whole world in his hands, the one who's supposed to have a plan for you, the one who's supposed to make the world better for you if you only had faith... might not. Because he's playing racquetball with this world, doesn't seem to have a plan for me, and hasn't rewarded those who have unshakeable faith.

Agreed. Thing is that people who believe in God won't be swayed by reason. I don't mean that in a bad way, and I'm not talking about the sexually repressed homophobes, the "every sperm is sacred" right to lifers, or any of the pan-Am nutjobs.. I mean the well-intentioned well-mannered benign people who just happen to believe in God. At the end of the day, I'll get no comfort by trying to convince them... I'll say my piece and disagree with their propositions but if they draw comfort from their faith, or it helps them to grieve... well let it be. I had a friend in my old English class, he was abused from a young age, was dealing drugs a year prior to college, violent, the lot. The whole God thing took over and he became a nice, intelligent guy.

My point is that God may be false, and there is nothing inherently nihilistic about atheism, nor is there anything inherently benign about theism, but sometimes the delusion is a crutch to people who need it, and who are we to take that away. If they'll listen to reason, then great, if they still have misplaced faith, then as long as it doesn't harm anyone I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

I'm still trying to find info about that current leading british scientist(with a huge IQ) that has through his understanding of science, come to believe in a creator.

There are some scientists that do come to that understanding, but then I'd take the views of a biochemist as seriously in this matter as I would a plumber. Specifically, he came to that belief through the intelligent design argument which relies on the complexity of the universe to predicate the self to imply intelligent design i.e. God. Unfortunately, few scientists have heard of the principle of sufficient reason which utterly pwns that argument. The "sense" argument does not imply a God, any more than any gap in science does. Anthropological differences in deisms refutes the idea of a trans-human God, and lack of evidence against does not mean evidence for. IQ is irrelevant Thor, unless you are trying to create a strawman of the atheist argument that says "intelligent? atheist." which has not been said.

The concept of an atheist will eventually be a hard position as we understand more of existance. IMO it really is just how much one puts a value on nature. Those who completely appreciate all of what the laws of nature do, could be considered practically deist. I believe that the majority of scientists are deist in some sense, anyway. The confusion comes in the fact that they don't want to relate the deist belief in nature with the theist belief in religion. Is it possible that there is a god that is exactly like what christianity or other major religions say? Probably not. Is it possible that they could have one part of the truth of nature? Maybe, but that's impossible to know.

All of which has been refuted by the PSR, and philosophical understanding has, from the pre-Socratics, moved from essentialism to existentialism, in other words moved away from a position friendly to God. *returns to orgy with inflatable Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Kamus and Sartre*

Bah. Ultimately it's all a matter of moral relativity; all religions are on the sense grounds when it comes to reality

Just relativism I think you mean? In which case, you are assuming that contradictory ideas about God are equally valid if I can assume your argument applies to any theological belief, in which case God = 0, which brings us back to my main aforementioned argument. Yes it is relativistic but it is meaningless because it lacks context when God = 0, I might as well talk about the relativity of Snow White to Moby Dick.

The Glory of God is Intelligence.

I thought it was faith?

Humanity is the central creation of the universe.

Pray tell, how is mankind above the animals? Relating back to your previous statement, if one creates a lifeform that is more intelligent than us humans, does that lifeform become the central creation of the universe?

The questions revolve around a bullsh*t fairytale and you are barking up the wrong tree completely.

Perhaps, but if one accepts those fairy tales one can still question them. It's never quite as simple as a stark choice between atheism or stupidity, for stupidity exists in as many degrees and textures as intelligence itself . And atheism |= intelligence.

I will say that intelligence may tend to nihilism which may tend to atheism however.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Brent
God does not have the power to do anything ungodlike. God does not have the power to control people.

That wouldn't be an omnipotent god, then.

Originally posted by Brent
Where it says God hardens someone's heart, it is a mistranslation that should say that person hardens his or her own heart.

Biblical scholars are going to disagree with you.

Originally posted by Brent
God does not engineer evil

If YHWH didn't create Evil, where did it come from?

Originally posted by Brent
but He does allow evil.

That's not a morally perfect being, then.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Sava
I think that's a poor argument because it leaves out any notion of free will. Maybe God has made a commitment to not interfering with humanity's free will.

An omnipotent god precludes freewill. A deterministic universe precludes freewill as well.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Brent
It is God's will for evil to exist, because without evil there is no goodness.

Everybody is good to everybody else, so nobody is good to anybody else? No, that just doesn't wash.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
So we define omnipotence as still subject to logic. So G-d cant make a knot He cant untie. To put it another way, he cant change HIS essential nature. Maybe.

That just says omnipotence is a self-contradictory term. Which is funny, because once the Church defined WHYH in a whole bunch of similar, self-contradictory terms, theists had been having an extremely hard time extracting themselves. So much so that, most discussions on the nature of YHWH eventually end when the theist side fall back on incomprehensibility, e.g. "God is beyond logic" or "God is beyond your imagination."

IOW, they beat a hasty retreat after suffering severe beatings.