Why believe in a god?

Christians,Jews,Muslims,Buddhists,etc,all have beliefs in one or another divine being.

Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, and Judaism ARE theistic religions. Buddhism is not.

You have been listening to the wrong.. crowd…

and you have been sold a bill of goods…

You have been lied to, and deceived…

If you will truly seek the truth, you will find it.

I guess I’ll be the first to say, “what”?!

They’re using advanced scientific and metaphysical terminology, which roughly translated into plain English, means, “I don’t know either.’’

That’s not at all what I meant. I never would tell you that the scientific explanation for things explains perfectly, but it’s better to follow something based on evidence rather than on none whatsoever. In that respect, gods are plenty worse for explaining.

I also agree with no77

By the way I have read the bible. This is what I’m talking about. Because I’m not christian he/she assume that I haven’t read the bible. Because if I read it surly I would be a believer.

Well if there is no GOD then how did the earth get created and WHO mad the trees,animals,the ground and sky, and the ocean. People believe in GOD because they have FAITH you have to have FAITH to believe in GOD and in the BIBLE it say ‘s that GOD created man from dirt and mad woman from’s man’s ribs,So I don’t believe that we came from moneys, GOD is the only one that created us.

no77, I agree with everything you said. It’s just a bunch of ancient nonsense that no educated person would believe if they weren’t brainwashed to do so.

I agree with mandyloo add one brain washing from birth. There is no real proof of God. I wonder why if God is all powerful being could be challenged by human science. Not even directly. Your right you can’t use the bible to prove the bible either.

Very intellectual! I don’t believe in god or an existance of god! But! I do believe in something greater than me… Whether it be a god, a goddess, an animal… Whatever it be… you have to have proof, and prove it to me, that this greater thing, a higher power then me! IS REAL! And that! IS what make me an agnostic!

People do it for different reasons.

But I think a lot of people just like to believe in something. They want to believe that there is a higher being that’s helping them out and watching out for them.

Also all the reasons Mandyloo listed.

Why believe in a god? I don’t know.

Christians,Jews,Muslims,Buddhists,etc,all have beliefs in one or another divine being.

  If you think about it,everyone believes in just about one Almighty being(animal,person,God Himself...)beause a human being is a being which needs reassurance in times of need.To understand why we do so may not be as complex as it sounds.
   It is for the sake of feeling secure,of feeling that a greater being is watching over us,helping us.Along with that is molded the daily life rules,etc,forming a proper religion.

I’ve been through all of this before with you as well. Ockham’s razor isn’t satisfied with no explanation… because it ISN’T an explanation… how does this continue to confuse you?

You kindly provided Ockham’s razor… do you understand that no explanation cannot be the simplest one? If not shall I define simplicity? No explanation has a value of [0] A laundry list of unsubstantiated explanations have a value of [0] Your [0] and the other[0] are equivalent. Provide a simple explanation… then you can argue Ockham’s razor.

Shall I define fluctuation here? I’ve read of string theory suggesting that matter fluctuates between realities depending on the resonance of the energy strings… but this isn’t exactly the same as self-creation… but… like you have suggested… fluctuation.

Because there is a problem with reality… in this cause and effect reality that we inhabit… we see an effect without a cause. Evolution describes the method… not the source. So does the big bang theory. I’ve argued before that “nothing” doesn’t satisfy ockham’s razor as the simplest explanation. This is a cop out. Everything that we can’t see is conjecture. One’s conjecture isnt any more valuable than another’s. If there is “no good answer”… why have you come to a conclusion?

Any one as intelligent as you’re referring to could not have been thinking rationally or intelligently when they came to the conclusion that there was a god. There is simply no evidence to believe such a thing. Faith is the only way, and having faith is not technically intelligent.

Not sure what your point is anyway, because there are about a zillion stupid people that believe in God, as well as stupid people that don’t.

“But assuming that because the basic laws that we observe in our lives (cause & effect) must be true for the beginning of the universe is wrong.”

Then assuming the opposite is right? Are you suggesting that we can reasonably predict the consequence following a certain guideline up until a point… then we stop because our conclusions cease to follow? Sounds as if you are uncertain.

I agree that gods are no better at explaining… but I disagree that an explanation isn’t warranted. Gods are no worse for explaining.

Scientists won’t pretend they can explain the effect-without-a-cause thing. But assuming that because the basic laws that we observe in our lives (cause & effect) must be true for the beginning of the universe is wrong. Also, gods are no better at explaining this. Why would they exist in the first place? It doesn’t make any more sense, and the only response Christians or religious people have is that He existed forever and didn’t need a cause. Oh, okay!

God is a very powerful person. though you never see him he is always there watching. He is your protector,your hero.

some people believe and some don’t but if your the one who doesnt I suggest you pick up a Bible and treat it with respect and just read.

then you can truly decide what your belifes are on God.

– ANYBODY NEED ADVICE??? SEND ME FUN MAIL..I ANSWER EVERY QUESTION SENT TOO ME =] HAVE A HAPPY DAY!

People believe in God for these reason’s:

-Fear -Hopefulness -Because it is what they have been taught -Christianity looks down on questioning their relgion -Answers for why things go wrong

I dont believe in God. I do however can understand why some people do. It would be a wonderful feeling to know that I would go somewhere after this life and live with all of my family and friends and never know any pain or suffering. It would be great to have something to blame when things go wrong, instead of putting the blame on myself.

That doesn’t make it right though. I know in my opinion there is no God, and have accepted that fact after studying many relgions and reading different relgious texts.

WELL a lot OF people ASKED DIS QUESTION I ASKED DIS QUESTION BEFORE.WELL GOD 2 ME IS A GOOD MEN HE ANSWER ALL PREYERS EVERYTIME I PREY 2 HIM IM ALWAYS FEELING GOOD ABOUT what I HAVE DONE SOMETIMES HE don’t DO DA THINGS you WANT HIM 2 DO BUT LETS FACE IT GOD IS DA ANSWER 2 ALL QUESTIONS when your SAD JUSS GO 2 HIM TRUST HE WILL LEAVE you FEELING BETTER ALL you HAVE 2 DO IS BELIEVE and HIM and LEAVE your HARDSHIPS and HIS HANDS and HE WILL WORK WIT you BUT JUSS BELIEVE and HIM and U WILL UNDERSTAND why HE IS A GOOD MEN

If you will truly seek the truth, you will find it.

That in itself is a LIE.

I’m sorry to be blunt, but right back at ya.

I guess I’ll be the first to say, “what”?!

For myself…I don’t know…One thing I DO know, there is, and has been thousands and thousands of people way smarter than any one on this site, who do or did believe in God…and came to their own conclusions…

Maybe it’s a life long question…subject to change as experience is gathered.

p

Sorry guys but that’s true. There is not, and never going to be any scientific proof that God exists or the Bible was written. It’s a fact. So, it all comes down to what you want to believe.

“but if your the one who doesnt I suggest you pick up a Bible and treat it with respect and just read.”

Why do you assume we haven’t? Many of us likely know more about the bible and christian theology and history than you do, and we’ve decided it’s all a load of poppycock.

Why treat it with respect, and why do I need to be an expert on something I believe is of completely questionable origins? You don’t need to know all about leprechauns to say that they’re not real.

Why are you acting like it would’ve been impossible for any of that to happen without God? And there you go, quoting the Bible as if it’s proof of itself. It’s not.

Your argument sort of come backs to haunt you, in that you can’t answer how God came to be in the first place. Just because you like the idea of a man in the sky more than a big bang doesn’t mean you’re right.

And evolution is pretty widely accepted among scientists, who use a much more rational procedure to come to a conclusion. You’d laugh at a scientist if he said that he didn’t have evidence, but rather a strong “faith” about something. It’s also a bit funny that you’re implying that creating man from dirt and a mad woman’s ribs makes MORE sense than men evolving from apes. At least evolution has proof to back itself up, rather than relying on “the Bible tells me so”.

*Well if there is no GOD then how did the earth get created and WHO mad the trees,animals,the ground and sky, and the ocean.

Your question is invalid. You cannot ask people who do not believe in Creationism, how the Earth was ‘created’

People believe in GOD because they have FAITH you have to have FAITH to believe in GOD

That’s a little redundant, you don’t need faith to believe, when faith itself IS belief. The ‘belief without knowing’ to be exact.

in the BIBLE it say ‘s that GOD created man from dirt and mad woman from’s man’s ribs,So I don’t believe that we came from moneys

So… you believe it because the book says so… okay…

GOD is the only one that created us.

You’re obviously having trouble with the concept of a ‘non-creationist’ view of existence. If you can’t even form sentences without sprinkling ‘creationism’ in it, then there’s no point in trying to explain other possibilites to you.

Okay… but what about things that have no empirical evidence? Gods are no worse for explaining… I’ve been through this before… you cannot argue that nothing is of more value than another unsubstantiated thing.

We have a problem… all that we know had a cause. We can speculate as to whether alternate realities have the same problem or not… if we venture there we can further speculate whether or not these other realities require a cause… we know for certain that in ours it is the case. It is a gigantic problem.

How can anything exist uncreated?.. you say that a god isnt any better because we then must explain the gods genesis… yet endorse a solution of its own accord. I say six of one/half dozen of the other. The only difference is that we know for certain that nothing in our universe exists without a corporeal cause… so then we question reality. I consider reality more than the physical stimuli that we can perceive.

I believe in free will. I believe that a thought needs no catalyst. I say that ideas have been the catalyst for lots of corporeal things… so to me they are just as real. They are abstract…and intangible… do you consider them real?

“…it’s better to follow something based on evidence rather than on none whatsoever.”

Provide some evidence for the theory of everything being self created. This includes the laws that govern our reality. I don’t know how it is possible relying on empirical observable criteria… but if you can… please share.

micegenymiser: Occam’s razor: All else being equal, the simplest explanation is usually the best one. You yourself acknowledge that adding a god to the equation explains nothing - it merely complicates matters further. I could come up with any number of convoluted ‘explanations’ of this type, each with more steps than the last, and use your argument of “why not” to insist they should be accepted as equally probably causes, but Occam’s razor wisely points out that if you have two explanations that describe the same thing, it makes more sense to pick the simpler one.

“The only difference is that we know for certain that nothing in our universe exists without a corporeal cause”

No, we don’t, actually. Quantum physics allows for the spontaneous creation of particle/antiparticle pairs, without any ‘corporeal cause’ whatsoever. Some speculate that the universe itself could simply be an extremely large quantum fluctuation.

“For myself…I don’t know…One thing I DO know, there is, and has been thousands and thousands of people way smarter than any one on this site, who do or did believe in God…and came to their own conclusions…”

Intelligence, or lack thereof is not a requirement for beliefor or non-belief. Very smart people can still be brainwashed, and they can also have defense mechanisms that prevent them from accepting certain truths about the world because. Hitler and many of his followers were extremely intelligent, and their belief system was psychotic. Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Some people are just unwilling, or incapable of admiting that there is a possiblity that what they believe is untrue.

“no matter what the unleashed, usual Christian Faith-Bashers say here.”

Amblessed, what would you say if I called you an unleashed, atheist-basher? But it is atheists who pick figts, right?

“I’ve been through all of this before with you as well. Ockham’s razor isn’t satisfied with no explanation… because it ISN’T an explanation… how does this continue to confuse you?”

On the one hand, for argument’s sake, we have no explanation. On the other hand, we have no explanation, with a whole lot of complicated hand-waving added. Of course we can apply occam’s razor here: Nothing is added by the handwaving, so it’s simpler to leave it out.

“Shall I define fluctuation here? I’ve read of string theory suggesting that matter fluctuates between realities depending on the resonance of the energy strings… but this isn’t exactly the same as self-creation… but… like you have suggested… fluctuation.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy

You are applying Ockham’s razor to a problem that doesn’t exist, I.e., the problem of complicating a nonexistent explanation. This is prime circular logic. You are using Ockham’s razor on the problem of complicating your nonexistent explanation, to put it correctly.

You don’t use it on the original philosophical problem. There are those of us who can offer philosophical answers to a philosophical question… those that arent so stringently adherent to physical protocol. Ockham’s razor is a philosophical tool. When used in the context of physical existence… it is acceptable to postulate a noncorporeal precursor that cannot be proven. You stop at the question. You don’t offer an explanation. You simply say that it is…mind you any unsubstantiated speculation on your part beyond…[it is] is to put it in your words…”hand waving.”

It took a little digging… but thanks to your url… I think I understand what you were referring to… you were referring to virtual particles. Two quotes…the first from your provided url… the second from wikipedia’s virtual particle page.

“Vacuum fluctuations are always created as particle/antiparticle pairs. The creation of these virtual particles near the event horizon of a black hole has been hypothesized by physicist Stephen Hawking to be a mechanism for the eventual “evaporation” of black holes.”

“In the quantum field theory view, “real particles” are viewed as being detectable excitations of underlying quantum fields. As such, virtual particles are also excitations of the underlying fields, but are detectable only as forces but not particles. They are “temporary” in the sense that they appear in calculations, but are not detected as single particles. Thus, in mathematical terms, they never appear as indices to the scattering matrix, which is to say, they never appear as the observable inputs and outputs of the physical process being modelled. In this sense, virtual particles are an artefact of perturbation theory, and do not appear in a nonperturbative treatment. As such, their objective existence as “particles” is questionable”

These quotes do not address the cause of the flux… [I will assume that their “virtual” existence on the event horizons of black holes indicate that they are fluctuations of already incorporealized energy from another point in spacetime]… but they do point out that these particles are not classical.