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

[bengerboy]

---

i really do believe in God.... with all my heart and soul.... (christian man gud ko i'm not a catholic by the way)

[gareb]

the question of origins began as a philosophical question. now it is being answered by science, so much so that it can illustrate in a scientific process how the universe began... and not just vague 'i-do-not-know-howhe-did-it-but-he-did' persuasions that religion (and philosophy) places it.

indeed, to designate the issue of origins in an exclusively theological and/or philosophical question (as you just suggested) affirms the default position that the origin of the universe is 'unknowable' or that we should best kept it with traditional theistic explanations, which of course does not help us in understanding the process of how we came to be. the conservative static view that theists propagate limits humanity's ability to move about without the fetters of tradition and religion.

be it known that so many Christians (and those belongin to other religions) have been burnt at the stake, hanged, beheaded and treated in the most inhumane ways because of the simple fact that they defied religion and used common sense, used science instead of tradition, or simply believed in something else that traditional religion does not subscribe to. even as of present, a degree of discrimination cannot be denied. so much for the rationality of Christianity or any other religion for that matter.

i suggest you read Stephen Hawking's 'A Brief History of Time' to understand more on theoretical physics and how the universe began. indeed the questions that you have posted here will be answered. be wary though as if logic is in conflict with reality, reality always prevails. http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...ith/cause.html

as for your example, a question immediately came to me; the issue about "intercessionary prayers", sounds so much like Roman Catholic dogma to me, which, of course, the Lutherans and the Calvinists (along with the majority of the Protestant Churces) rejected. seems odd.

anyway here are a few of the many experiments done to see if indeed the aformentioned claim is valid. a nice comment about the Byrd experiment is this:

Victor Stenger refers to two "intercessory prayer studies that have been published in medical journals, accompanied by great media hype. For example, cardiologist Randolph Byrd has claimed evidence that coronary patients benefited from blind, distant intercessory prayer. But his p-value is only five percent. Such results would be expected from statistical fluctuations alone every twenty experiments, on average. Another study along the same line as Byrd's has been published in a major medical journal... There, positive results are reported at a p-value is four percent, but for different criteria than Byrd's. In fact, they fail to confirm Byrd's specific results."

as a conclusion:

Some past studies have shown that prayer promotes healing. However, none have reached the level of certainty required to produce confidence that a real effect is being observed. Many of the studies have been defective in their organization, so that researcher or subject bias affected the results. The first large double-blind study has shown that prayer does not aid or inhibit healing.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/medical4.htm

and to think that this refutation *actually* came from theists themselves.

curious.

[FK]

you have faith on your scientist... i have faith in God.

[luv2luv]

u dont have to see something w/ ur own 2 eyes to believe its existence..
jst look at all d good things in u and around u..
air is made to be felt and not to be seen.. so is God..

[tolstoi]

guys this maybe long..but its worth reading..here it goes...


An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem science has with God, The Almighty.

He asks one of his new students to stand and.....
Prof: So you believe in God?
Student: Absolutely, sir.
Prof: Is God good?
Student: Sure.
Prof: Is God all-powerful?
Student: Yes.
Prof: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal him.
Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God didn't. How is this God good then? Hmm?
Student: (Student is silent.)
Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?
Student: Yes.
Prof: Is Satan good?
Student: No.
Prof: Where does Satan come from?
Student: From...God...
Prof: That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?
Student: Yes.
Prof: Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything. Correct?
Student: Yes.
Prof: So who created evil?
Student: (Student does not answer.)

Prof: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don't they?
Student: Yes, sir.
Prof: So, who created them?
Student: (Student has no answer.)
Prof: Science says you have 5 senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son...Have you ever seen God?
Student: No, sir.
Prof: Tell us if you have ever heard your God?
Student: No , sir.
Prof: Have you ever felt your God, tasted your God, smelt your God? Have you ever had any sensory perception of God for that matter?
Student: No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't.
Prof: Yet you still believe in Him?
Student: Yes.
Prof: According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?
Student: Nothing. I only have my faith.
Prof: Yes. Faith. And that is the problem science has.
Student: Professor, is there such a thing as heat?
Prof: Yes.
Student: And is there such a thing as cold?
Prof: Yes.
Student: No sir. There isn't.
(The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.)
Student: Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don't have anything called cold.
We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that.
There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat.
We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.
(There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.)
Student: What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?
Prof: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness?

Student: You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something.
You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light....But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it?
In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?
Prof: So what is the point you are making, young man?

Student: Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.
Prof: Flawed? Can you explain how?

Student: Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God.
You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can
measure.
Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one.
To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing.
Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor.
Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?
Prof: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.

Student: Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?
Prof: (The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize
where the argument is going.)

Student: Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavour, are you not teaching your opinion, sir?
Are you not a scientist but a
preacher?
Prof: (The class is in uproar.)

Student: Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain?
Prof: (The class breaks out into laughter.)

Student: Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelt it?.....No one appears to have done so.
So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable
protocol, science says that you have no brain, sir.
With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?

Prof: (The room is silent. The professor stares at the student, his face unfathomable.)
Prof: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son.

Student: That is it sir.. The link between man & God is FAITH. That is all that keeps things moving & alive.

[zer0_cooL]

no i dont

[benz_jie2002]

yah i do believe in God....

[tingkagol]

I believe in a supreme entity yet I do not believe in the christian views of God. There's far too much to say, it's giving me a headache. So I'll just lay quiet for now.

[E|ghtBaLL]

I do believe in God. Jesus Christ is my Lord, strength and armor....

[gareb]

you have faith on your scientist... i have faith in God.

you do not make one thing exist through 'faith' alone.

and no. it is not 'faith' in scientists. it just so happens that they can explain things without any obscurities such as the mystery of creation or all those metaphysics.

no need to conjure up the supernatural when a rational and completely natural explanation would do. conjuring up phantoms and phantasmagorical explanations are what early humans like to do best. we, of course, know better.

tolstoi: that is neo-platonism at its best. unfortunately it does not suffice. besides, the student is entirely wrong. the refutation (i have done this already) is fairly simple.

evil = abscence of good? therefore god is not omni-present (he is not present when evil happens as good is absent in it)

evolution= unobserved? that kid should update his school books.

seeing one's brain? the kid has not scanned the medical books for something called a 'hemispherectomy' which is a surgical process of removing a hemisphere of one's brain, so much so that one could actually still function well, even if only half of one's brain is present in his head. obviously your aclaimed theist student lives in the 18 century as he has not heard of MRI or CAT scans. so much for the non-existence of brains.

faith = belief without proof. removed of its regalia, theism is basically just this.

honestly, i did not believe you could have posted something so full of logical as well as obvious material fallacies in it. :8O: