Do you believe in God? If so/if no, WHY?

[giver_bert]

---

"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." (Albert Einstein)

[giver_bert]

just a thought...

Is there any advantage to being an atheist

I've been looking for testimonies about the power of atheism to change lives... in some that i came acrossed, most atheists talk about being free to think critically - being a "free thinker.." However wonderful this freedom is, one must acknowledge that the atheist's freedom is not at all complete, but is very much limited by the philosophy of atheism.. According to atheism, all phenomenon have a naturalistic explanation. With this as its overriding paradigm, the atheist never considers a supernatural explanation, even when such an explanation makes more sense.. in fact, an atheist (err like gareb here) will believe in wildly unlikely explanations, for example, regarding the origin of life and the origin of the universe..

how much "freedom" does an atheist really have?

it has been blatantly stressed in this thread by athiests and some agnostics that christianity teaches people to ignore the facts and base their entire lives upon some sort of touchy-feely kind of "faith." which contrary to that view, the Bible teaches the importance of knowledge and wisdom and making rational decisions based upon the facts... perhaps the very reason why atheists attack christianity above all other religions is because it directly challenges the atheist's assertion that belief in God is irrational...

and i wonder why when it comes to morality, atheists tend to be very quiet about what role atheism plays in shaping their personal morality... i never find any posts (so far) from atheists saying that their atheism was influential in getting them off of drugs, stopping their alcoholism and ending their addictions to pornography, gambling, or any other personal moral fault.. the fact is that atheism has no power at all to change personal morality (in a positive way).

and from a societal viewpoint, atheists are generally not involved in helping the economically and socially disadvantaged. Of course, there are some exceptions, but in general atheists tend to be involved in legal/legislative issues, if any at all, with not much exclusion of the needs of the poor and uneducated. is there any atheistic moral dictate that would require or even suggest that atheists should help anyone??

Christianity, or any form of religion i presume is not just a belief system or a series of rituals that one does... tt is a living.. a vital relationship with the God Himself...

[mnpesiao]

I DO BELEIVE IN GOD

[jerx d great]

I really believe in God because that is what we bielive in since our childhood. I also appreciate those persons who don't bielive in him because they don't afraid the consequences. THEY ARE VERY BRAVE!!!!!! THEY HAVE NO FEAR!!!!!!!

[KiNoSHITaLiT3]

I DO .. i really DO...

[Zealot]

I absolutely believe in God

[Almidala]

YES!

[gareb]

i hear my name... oh well.

giver_bert: what dear Albert wanted to say when he was talking about religion was the attached morality in it. a code of conduct that is deemed beneficial for the common good. this is a cultural universal to all religions.

advantages? oh yes. many.

1. critical view of the current socio-political means of control. which incidentally is connected to how religion is used as a social control by powers that be within a society. an authoritarian institution like religion seeks a static mode of control (which of course is always challenged by new developments in both liberal aspects mainly pushed forth by science. think euthanasia, homosexuality, human-centric universe, evolution, etc.) think social classes and modes of control. think of Gramsci's theory on hegemony and Friere's pedagogy of the oppressed.

2. scientific view of natural phenomena. indeed science seeks a 'naturalistic explanation' to things that happen around us. no need to seek the supernatural as the concept of God even is incomprehensible by those who rely purely on faith and not on understanding. i am sure we can find plenty of such. so much for something that makes 'more sense'. naturalistic explanation does. it gives you the whole process, an not something vague as how holy books and legends conjure things out of nothing. unfortunately still, such evidently rational explanations are not accepted as we would rather rely on obscurantist theology and pseudo-scientific explanations.

3. scientific view of spiritualism which mainly relies on sociological studies of religion, its modes of development and entrenchment, and neurological and behavioral genetics studies on how the state of spirituality is merely a brain function coming from 'inside', opposite to the assertion that the main push of spirituality is from the 'outside', as well as genetic basis for such behavior.

4. religion and spirituality as psychological defense mechanism no need to elaborate. this is the so-called 'invisible means of support'. with this at hand, no need to scream that 'spirituality (belief/faith) saved me' as that would be an attribution error. with this at hand, we can fairly say that it was the motivation caused by the belief and not the belief itself. same applies with motivation caused by other factors in life.

5. seeing morality in a social context, rather in a theological/religious one. seeing it in the latter is the main cause of quite a number of fanatics in all religions. seeing it in the former makes one see why it exists in the first place, its structure, what makes it tick, and the loopholes that it has, and the latent contradictions that it has with social change.

6. and lastly, a workable version on reality that relies on humanity and its power to chose, rather than on fatalistic and spiritualistic means of achieving one's/society's goal. an explanation that provived a workable framework, and not a "we-may-never-know" attitude. a model that grants the power from the gods in heaven to the hands of man.

[giver_bert]

Gareb:

Yeah.. and speaking about naturalistic explanation as applied to the orgin of universe, which would suggest that the universe arose from some super universe by an " evolutionary" process.. and that the universe is so finely tuned that this is the only reasonable explanation for how our universe happens to be suitable for the formation of stars, planets, and life.. the formation of a single universe with exactly the right combinations of laws of physics, size, etc. is so unlikely by chance as to be impossible... a person, i guess, who believes in naturalism alone must also believe that a super universe exists which is capable of producing an almost infinite number of other universes with vastly differing laws of physics.. they hypothesize that our universe just happens, by chance, to have the proper set of laws to allow for the formation of stars, planets, and life... and in order to be a logic-based atheist (as opposed to a faith-based one), you must believe in the multi-universe theory.. that is completely illogical, and, in fact, requires more blind faith than to believe that God designed the universe... watcha think?

what difference would this be at theists' belief on what you consider as religious dogmas?


still, i'm thinking of any particular activity where atheists are majorly involved in helping the economically and socially disadvantaged.. of course, there are some exceptions, but in general observation (i could be wrong though) atheists tend to be involved in legal/legislative issues, if any at all, to the exclusion of the needs of the poor and uneducated.. the truth of this can be best exemplified on occasion like during yuletide season... a number of religious organizations even churches do sponsor and other humanitarian activities . i cannot be sure that there were no atheists at those events, but certainly it's all done for the spirit of christmas..

on occasions like this, i can't help but ask where were the atheists? isn't there any atheistic moral dictate that would require or even suggest that atheists should help anyone.. : does this make their concept of morality far better than the believers? well.. i hope you could enlighten me and perhaps i might change my thought on these things..



OT: i'll reply to your pm later.. have to go now!

[jamescebu]

of course yEs! by all mEaNs!!!!!!!!