Why Humans Believe in God

[munzter666]

---

God cannot be explained by our human consciousness---does that mean, then, that we have to believe that there is a GOD? that's illogical. i'd rather keep the concept of GOD as a scientific hypothesis rather than concluding that GOD is REAL.

how to know that GOD is inside you? you wouldn't.



i'm referring to GOD here as a Proper noun, doesn't matter if it's singular or plural.



oh noes... don't confuse "believing" in GOD with experimenting GOD. if you see GOD as unknowable and unreachable to grasp by human consciousness, not knowing GOD doesn't have to entail that we should BELIEVE in him. again, why believe in something that is beyond our limits to understand? you know, we have a conscious choice to believe what we believe. you can believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, but you choose not to, because you know there is no Flying Spaghetti Monster---yet you believe in GOD---yet you don't know if GOD exists or not.

so don't ever say just because GOD is beyond our limits that we then have to believe in him. you're making it sound like we don't have a choice.



man is an animal. again, you're confusing things. humans ARE animals. we ARE members of the animal kingdom.

i share the same sentiments.
and the textbook answer to:

God cannot be explained by our human consciousness---does that mean, then, that we have to believe that there is a GOD? that's illogical. i'd rather keep the concept of GOD as a scientific hypothesis rather than concluding that GOD is REAL.

how to know that GOD is inside you? you wouldn't.

faith.
then again, faith nullifies logic. that really just leaves us with a conscious choice to believe or not to believe.

would i outright believe in a mystery msg saying i won bajillion moolahs despite no evidences other than circular reasoning? oh nose.

[chad_tukes]

i agree with this..

why would you impose your own belief of God.. we arent machines you know.. whats the point of God giving us the power of choice if he forces us to believe in him, that would be contradictory to himself. whether you believe it or not. its your choice so please mind your own business and dont impose it on us coz we have other views on such matter

why do you worry if somebody tells you your an animal.. arent you a homo sapien sapien? people should get in touch with their true identity.. truth will set you free.. humans are animals.. we are as flesh and blood as the dogs and cats and the monkeys..

harness you animal nature.. embrace it.. truth will set you free from the confines of established superstitions (aka religion)

bible (or other scripture) quoting people makes me sick...

heheh yeah... the thing is, we love behaving like "machines".

example: Priest tells you to do this and that, you follow.

i share the same sentiments.
and the textbook answer to:
faith.
then again, faith nullifies logic. that really just leaves us with a conscious choice to believe or not to believe.

would i outright believe in a mystery msg saying i won bajillion moolahs despite no evidences other than circular reasoning? oh nose.

if it was the case, then we would all be bajillionaires.

[kenshinsasuke]

Just like nga nitoo q nga naa koy amahan,...

[The_Child]

it is a consciousness just like animal and human consciousness... particle or a wave? quality or a thing are part of our human consciousness... and Christ Consciousness is higher than that so we cannot describe it from that perspective

if we cannot describe it from that perspective, then why is it that you in the first place uttered it. If we cannot describe it, why is it that you compound the consciousness and Christ, the former entails a mental process extending beyond and the latter entails 'messiah' which may properly be appropriated to a historical person. this is in itself a description.

but you said it cannot be described?

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

I see that PASCAL'S WAGER makes more sense than the ATHEIST WAGER . On the literal side / should I say outside the SPIRITUAL side on why I believed in a God or for that matter an existence of a SUpreme Being .

[chad_tukes]

I see that PASCAL'S WAGER makes more sense than the ATHEIST WAGER . On the literal side / should I say outside the SPIRITUAL side on why I believed in a God or for that matter an existence of a SUpreme Being .

so would it then be safe to say that we can apply Pascal's wager to anything other than God? i mean, not the Pascal's wager per se, but the idea itself.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

Not necessarily .... but in the case of observing a SUPREME BEING not by FAITH but by being RATIONAL .

On a different note ... thats how people succeeded right ? By being " SIGURISTA " , not a perfectionist mindset but oversees everything that there is no room fo errors .

[munzter666]

I see that PASCAL'S WAGER makes more sense than the ATHEIST WAGER . On the literal side / should I say outside the SPIRITUAL side on why I believed in a God or for that matter an existence of a SUpreme Being .

unfortunately, pascal's wager is flawed. aside from not covering the whole nine yards, it wreaks more on selfishness and cowardice. to believe out of FEAR rather than out of LOVE and other chvaness bible huggers preach and rant about. with a mindset to expect some reward for every itsy bitsy good thing they do.

[chad_tukes]

The most obvious problems with Pascal's Wager are:

* How do you know which God to believe in? There are plenty to choose from, and if you pick the wrong one, you could be in big trouble (e.g. what if you choose Jesus, but get to heaven only to come face-to-trunk with Ganesh?). This is known as the "Avoiding the wrong Hell problem". If a dozen people of different religions came to you with Pascal's Wager, how could you possibly choose between them? After all, many religions are quite specific that they are the One True Religion, and not any others. Jesus Christ said "I am the way, the truth and the light. None shall come to the Father except through me." [emphasis added] and no doubt most other religions make similar claims. If a Christian considers the Wager as strong support for his faith, surely he must accept that it is equally valid for all other religions when presented to himself?

* God is not stupid. Won't He know that you're just trying to get a free ride into Heaven? How can you sincerely believe in a God simply out of convenience?

* If there is no God, you have still lost something. You have wasted a good portion of your life performing the various devotional rituals, attending Churches, praying, reading scripture and discussing your deity with His other followers. Not to mention giving your hard-earned money to the church, wasting your intelligence on theological endeavours and boring the hell out of people who really don't want to hear your Good News.

* Can you get away with just sort of generally believing in a Supreme Being, without specifically believing in one particular Deity? Probably not - God will still know what you're up to. Also, many Gods are quite particular about how they should be worshipped. Many born-again Christians will tell you that the only way to Heaven is through accepting Jesus Christ as your personal saviour - nothing more and nothing less. General-Deity-Belief and being nice simply won't do. Many people believe that all the different religions are merely alternative routes to the same destination. Nice and tolerant (if a little warm'n'fuzzy) though this may be, there is no valid reason to accept this stance over the fire-and-brimstone fundamentalist position : if the fundies are right, then the un-Saved liberal theists are in just as much trouble as the nonbelievers.

* Few, if any, atheists disbelieve in deities out of choice. It's not as if we know the god is really there, but somehow refuse to believe in it (for example, see if you can choose to truly believe that Australia does not exist). Most atheists disbelieve simply because they know of no compelling evidence to suggest that any sort of god exists. If you want an atheist to believe, show her some good evidence, don't just say it's in her best interests to believe even if there is no god. A person cannot choose to sincerely believe in something, just because it is pragmatic to do so. Sure, you could say all the right prayers and attend church regularly, but that is not the same thing as actually believing, and any God worth his salt would obviously see straight through that.

* It is quite insulting. It amounts to a thinly veiled threat, little better than saying "Believe in my God or He'll send you to Hell" (in fact, this is often the form it is presented in). Also, the theist making this threat assumes that the atheist believes there is a Hell or a God to send her there in the first place. If you don't believe in Hell anyway, it's not a scary thing to be threatened with - a bit like saying "If you don't start believing in unicorns, one will trample you to death while you're sleeping." Who would be worried by that?

* It is often self-refuting, depending on the person's description of God. If you believe that God will forgive anyone for anything, or judge people purely on how they lived their life and not what they believed, or that everyone gets to Heaven regardless (unless maybe they were genocidal cannibal serial killers), then the Wager is meaningless. You might as well say "Believe in God, or you'll... erm... go to Heaven anyway." In such a case, it doesn't make a scrap of difference whether the person believes or not.

Pascal's Wager

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

@ CHAD ...

I will make it cute , short n simple . It defied HARDCORE THINKING of an ATHEIST . We are not talking about God here observed by the Christians but a SUPREME BEING .

@ MUNZTER666 ...

Just as what ATHEIST WAGERS also presents the table . The point is , there is a SUPREME BEING and slowly mga atheist karon are coming back to life to reconcile with their spiritual side .