faith & religion

[Opeth V]

I do not believe in god.

I guess that it depends on your definition of "god." For one thing, I do not believe in the omniscient Christian God who sees all and judges everything. I think that particular God was created by mankind to instill fear and control over people.

 

[Hiljainen]

i have to read this whole thread when my head isn't already spinning

I do not believe in god.

I guess that it depends on your definition of "god." For one thing, I do not believe in the omniscient Christian God who sees all and judges everything. I think that particular God was created by mankind to instill fear and control over people.

i agree with you, i don't believe there is something above everyone else, all the "power", if we want to call it in this way, is in human minds.
especially in the past it was easier to control people with thoughts like god, also in case of war to give to the soldiers something to believe in

 

[hyena]

of course, the power lies in metal. didn't any of you learn anything from manowar?

 

[Hiljainen]

of course, the power lies in metal. didn't any of you learn anything from manowar?

of course! "power to the brothers of metal" :zombie:

 

[Steve]

I am Roman Catholic. For everyone who has their own view of our church, we are not fascist freaks or child molesters. very few priests were involved, and they are no longer a member of our faith community. Although many say Catholicism is "all or none" beliefs, I hold many beliefs of the church and interpret god my own way.

Religion should not give you a god. you should be led to a god to find on your own. I don't object to other's religions, but I do believe you should not be forced into it.

 

[Tranquil Chaos]

i don't beleive in anything and i think religions are silly, but to each their own.

 

[smågoth]

I guess Im sort of a novelty in this thread. Im actually christian.
I guess, this could be a result of me having the neurological
illness of ocd. Ocd is a illness that gives you scrouples. Its called
a doubting disease. The brains chemistry is over active in parts
of the brain, often resulting in an overactive consience.

Anyway, I also doubt alot. I was agnostic for years. I dont fully
belive in the bible, but if one reads just what Jesus said
in different situation I can agree with myself that this is pretty
radical and humanistic quotes. I dont belive christians have
the right to pass judgement on gays, atheists, other religions etc.
This seems to be the case in many christians. They get engulfed
in feeling better than others. Even warning people of hell etc.
They tell people theyre going to hell, and they do it with a passion.
I think (of the litle bit of the bible Ive red), that this is not actually allowed in the christian faith.

I never go to church, so I guess many would call me a non beliver.
I dont preach either. Its just a personal thing, where I hope Jesus
exists, and I hope there is some sort of afterlife. I frequently doubt it,
but then again, Im not your average christian. I guess I could call me
a christian/agnostic.

I do think religions have shaped our way of life. Just look how different
the moslem world is from the western world, how different the chinese,
and budhist countries are from westerns again.

 

[Thanatos]

wow, it got resurrected

 

[Tristessa]

I am atheist. I am completely sure that there isn't a God.
I haven't been an atheist all my life, my parents are catholics, but they didn't give me strict catholic basis so it helps me when after years of hesitation (I was agnostic) I chose my side a few months ago. I haven't told my dad, though, 'cause I'm pretty afraid of his reaction so I have to accept that I feel shitty 'cause I'm a worthless fainthearted.
I don't feel the need of something to believe in, but I'm not sure if special future situations will show me that I'm not strong enough to carry all by myself. I fear the future with no God, maybe 'cause I'm a new atheist and I'm getting accostumed to that fact.
When I used to believe, I had episodes where I was very devout, and I remember it was really comfortable to enter a church and feel the mystical peace filling every cell of my body. There is such a wonderful enviroment in the believer's meetings and I still feel very attracted to it, as well as I still use phrases such as "for God's sake." Those things are so deeply engraved in my mind that I'm sure I won't be able to get rid of them and I don't want to.
I just have one clear reason for not believing: I'm sure God is a mankind invention. I can't explain why I'm so sure of that, and the intend of doing it would be very long and tedious.

 

[hyena]

@thanatos: so there must be a god

@tristessa: i would be interested in reading your explanation, and to know about how your religious switch impacted your way of perceiving everyday things.

:hotjump: three catholics already on this thread! let's start a band!

 

[Malaclypse]

hehe

 

[DeepInMisery]

I am atheist. I am completely sure that there isn't a God.

you can't be. it's impossible. well, i'm just joking ok?

 

[rahvin]

you can't be. it's impossible. well, i'm just joking ok?

yes, i do think that being *positive* about either god's existence or god's non-existence can only come from an irrational act, i.e., a belief. the fact that logic might lead someone to think there is a god and others to think there isn't one, is just not the same thing as being sure of either.

edit: and someone please resize that pic.

rahvin.

 

[Misanthrope]

I disagree. There is enough facts about the human needs for a kind of god, enough evidence to prove that it was man who created god as an idealized version of himself and not the other way around, there is enough evidence that people dont believe in god and that they just believe for the shake of it, because they need to believe in something so they can sleep at night.

Yet there is no racional evidence that such a being exists. The whole " i cant prove it does but you cant prove it doesnt exist " logic its a kindergarden argument of people who truly are just looking to put a glass wall infront of them to avoid the issue. Nothing is real until proven, that is a fact.

 

[rahvin]

I disagree. There is enough facts about the human needs for a kind of god, enough evidence to prove that it was man who created god as an idealized version of himself and not the other way around, there is enough evidence that people dont believe in god and that they just believe for the shake of it, because they need to believe in something so they can sleep at night.

Yet there is no racional evidence that such a being exists. The whole " i cant prove it does but you cant prove it doesnt exist " logic its a kindergarden argument of people who truly are just looking to put a glass wall infront of them to avoid the issue. Nothing is real until proven, that is a fact.

for this issue alone, i choose to adhere to a very strict definition of "evidence", and one that does not include facts that are basically inferences from human sciences such as psychology and anthropology. the reason for this is i think the "can't prove either" scam is best disposed of when sticking to real factual arguments. it'd be way too easy for any believer to "prove" psychological traits are actual tell-tale signs of god's existence. it'd be way too easy for any believer to put your assumptions that "nothing is real until proven" on the same level as "an act of faith is needed to see". i think you can get tricked more easily if you allow rethoric or anthropologic arguments to be introduced in the "pure" existence vs. non-existence debate.
the fact that i, as an agnostic, accept the possibility of god's existence clearly clashes with the absence of rational evidence you mention, and i know it. but i consciously allow doubt to permeate me in order not to derogate from a strictly "logical" course of action. that same course of action tells me that as long as i have no technical evidence of a statement's falsehood, the most i can do is refrain from believe it true. and that's exactly what i do.

rahvin.

 

[Naku ist krig]

well.. you can call me insane and hypocrite..

NP: Emperor - Inno a Satana

 

[rahvin]

well.. you can call me insane and hypocrite..

really? thanks. i have no idea why i should, but i'll keep that in mind and use it as a wildcard when it's appropriate.

rahvin.

 

[Naku ist krig]

@rahvin: anytime..

 

[hyena]

he stated he believes in god and he's playing inno a satana. i don't think that this makes him a hypocrite, just someone with misguided musical tastes.

 

[Misanthrope]

for this issue alone, i choose to adhere to a very strict definition of "evidence", and one that does not include facts that are basically inferences from human sciences such as psychology and anthropology. the reason for this is i think the "can't prove either" scam is best disposed of when sticking to real factual arguments. it'd be way too easy for any believer to "prove" psychological traits are actual tell-tale signs of god's existence. it'd be way too easy for any believer to put your assumptions that "nothing is real until proven" on the same level as "an act of faith is needed to see". i think you can get tricked more easily if you allow rethoric or anthropologic arguments to be introduced in the "pure" existence vs. non-existence debate.
the fact that i, as an agnostic, accept the possibility of god's existence clearly clashes with the absence of rational evidence you mention, and i know it. but i consciously allow doubt to permeate me in order not to derogate from a strictly "logical" course of action. that same course of action tells me that as long as i have no technical evidence of a statement's falsehood, the most i can do is refrain from believe it true. and that's exactly what i do.

rahvin.

The logic itself is not faulty, the REAL reasons because of that logic ( fear ) are the ones faulty. To me, it is just avoiding whats not right in front of you by saying "it could be and you cant prove it, even knowing i cant see it i still think it could be there"