Does God Exist?

If God is not bound to laws and perspective of the beings in it, why is God bound to benevolence?

Also, you didn't answer my question as to where you think God's complexity came from, you think it's just an infinite persisting deity?

 

excluded and denied is what does not work of you...is all....just does not work some times...no one's fault....I keep saying the same things.

Does not mean that thing will not work for someone else.

 

I had a dream once, but then it turned into a nightmare.

 

I think God and it's complexity came from the same place the universe came from and I have no clue what is outside the universe. Or hold a specific belief in it so far. The universe could be a piece of mold in between an ice giants toe, or maybe it is the mind of our creator and we are all in it, or maybe the universe floats in a vacuum with many other universes. I don't have a conclusive thought about that.

About God being benevolent, while being outside our perspectives and the laws of the universe: I answered a similar question from you earlier: I think if God gave us (the ants, the birds, us and the dinosaurs in an earlier time) life He/It/She would applaud our efforts to experience it to the fullest without infringing on other lifes (as they should be experienced to the fullest as well). In that way God being good is a subjective perception because I like my life and all other lifes and everybody/everything's chance to live it. People that had a lot of misfortune in life or saw a lot of misfortune in others may come to a different conclusion about life and therefor also about God being good/benevolent.
I think God is good because he created life (through evolution to be sure, we were not forged out of clay 6 or 7000 years ago, but also to be sure, I see no issue with people who believe that). All life. That life ends or is subject to actions and reactions and therefor can take an unfortunate turn (through sickness or pain) does not change that for me personally. This is how the universe we are in (now at least ) works. That we can imagine a life without pain or sickness does not make God evil or mad or whatever in my humble opinion. Life is awesome, we all have to live with what we got. When there is war or robberies or whatever, I don't see how God can be blamed for that. When a person like neonspectraltoast aks why does God not come and tell what is the right religion I think only: God did not made religion. We (our fellow humans) did.

 

There are reasons why this topic has been a catalyst for wars, murder, torture and the like. People can rarely delve deeply into it without getting heated..there is a fine line that gets crossed when something another might say begins to tap , then crack into someone else's belief system. Even things said, that where not meant in a certain context, will be taken as such..then shtf , peeps get offended...and the entire coversation goes to hell in a hand basket. Its all about perception,and a persons perception does not always negate anothers.Nor, does it always support. With that said, if youre going to get in on a topc lkke this, you best be sure you keep emotions in check..otherwise, its all moot and you might as well not even get into it. Jmho

 

Logic and reason are the most objective standards we have at our disposal for discourse. Admittedly it can be a bit rigid and unwaivering at times but I think catering into a 'anything goes' philosophy on beliefs, which don't require substantiation is of no benefit to get people to think critically and question their own thoughts, assumptions and beliefs as well as others.

Not necessarily saying anything to the main topic, it's fascinating you would opt for beliefs which don't require substantiation over logic and reason.

 

.

included it in next post

 

I think some may also be conflating challenging beliefs with disrespecting beliefs.

 

I'll ask the gods...am I free to dance away now then?

 

Well, some people seemingly do have their emotions in check but are still out to disrespect other peoples belief. It is because they have an overly sense of being right. The same thing some atheists I've seen doing this are agitating against religious people. Then it becomes quite ironic and even a bit hypocritical.

Not anything goes, but yes, anything does go in theory (at least it should be imo). I think it sensible to draw a line. This line is when peoples beliefs affects other people in a negative way. Now, I have the feeling this is also where many atheists come from when they criticize religion or religious people. When they target such an action (when a person's unfounded belief is making them act on it in a negative way for others) or that person specificly then I have no issue with it at all. When they say that this happens by theistic belief on itself, especially when the people having it are part of an organized religion they seem to be stereotyping. And in a way through their incorrect oversimplification they are negatively acting on their beliefs also. It's like they then assume that their sense of feeling overly right justifies them to do the same thing they condemn religious folks of doing Don't you see that?

It is also flawed thinking to say logic and reason is less or not present in the mind of a person who has an unprovable faith or belief. You don't say this explicitly, but mr. Writer for instance did made claims like that. I think this is merely wishful thinking or coming once again from an overly strong feeling of being right.

 

Case in point..need I say more?

 

I'm just glad I expressed myself coherently and (I think) got my point across

 

Religion is so intimately involved in attempts to influence a lot of the public policies in terms of elections, progress of science, public policies, social standards in my country that I cannot really separate theistic belief from religion and it's perils itself in many cases. Now some people, even those in my family have claim to benefited from religion but I'm not sure whether to grant them those 'benefits' of religion or if those 'benefits' really come from ascribing to unrealistic depictions of morality, belief and understanding which religion imposes in the first place.

In regards to a specific argument or generally overall? If in regards to the former, I disagree.

How does one reconcile a belief that cannot be substantiated with logic and reason which requires one to substantiate the steps in their thinking? There is an inherent contradiction there.

I get the impression at times you are not referring to formal logic and reason when discussing the topic.

 

By most accounts, God is ineffable. That means we can only know what (S)he reveals to us directly or by inference through contemplation or observation of nature. Why God is the way (S)he is is a mystery.

 

Only if you're not a Baptist.

 

I understand. And when the fundamentalist christian community have such an influence on politics and society as they have there it can be said they are crossing the line of affecting people negatively. That's why the seperation of church and state is one of the best things that happened to our societies.

I was speaking in general. Some specifc beliefs are not sound at all, but then it would depend on the details of that specific example of course. I have the feeling that in my urge to make a conclusive sentence the result gets a bit too vague (partly because we have a different set of associations) because it is a too broad subject with too many variables. This is why I am glad there are people like Okiefreak and MeAgain on here who can explain it in much more detail, where I myself would get lost in all the nuances I would like to include in order to make it conclusive. I'll try to change this a little because I like exchanging thoughts that actually get understood by all my convo partners

 

Logic and reason may be our most objective standards, but are they the only path to knowledge. I also rely on experience, intuition, and the willingness to take a chance. Can you decide by logic and reason alone which of the various candidates would be the best president in the 2016 election? Is voting then irrational?

 

Nonsense, there is no rational basis for keeping an open mind about something that requires the opposite of logic, faith, to believe in its existence as something more than a concept of a deluded mind.

 

Voting is absolutely irrational, after all we had George W. Bush as president for 8 years.

Is it realistic to decide who would be the best president to vote for with logic and reason alone? Probably not

Could it be done? Potentially. I'm fairly certain if we relied more on logic and reason, the presidential race would legitimately be open to more than a 2 party system.

 

This philosophical and hypothetical topic is not spend well on you (after all if you had a sincere and serious interest in discussing this topic you would have by now ). You are of course entitled to your opinion but in threads like this you are adding nothing but repeat above statement over and over. You don't have to agree with any theistic concept or find it logical AT ALL, but to say the people that do like to ponder it or even have a sincere belief or faith in it are delusional is not interesting, constructive, helpful etc. etc. in any way. It just makes clear that you find it all ridicilous (which is fine, but no need to bully others about it or repeat it to the point you are regarded as nothing but annoying or offensive).

People that do like to seriously think about this with an open mind DO of course make use of logic and reason (those are actually the parts that make this thread worthwile). Which you can and would notice if you were not blinded by your dislike and prejudice of religious beliefs in general. We can too, so can you. If you would like to