|
|
| Do you believe in God? |
| Yes |
|
11% |
[ 6 ] |
| No |
|
54% |
[ 29 ] |
| Not exactly... (alternate deity(ies) or concept equivelant to God) |
|
33% |
[ 18 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:18 pm
gigacannon I voted no because I don't believe in anything that I would call God, but it's not strictly true. I believe in a few things, but mostly I don't believe in anything. Anything which might be considered real, and not just an abstract concept, I don't believe in. However, as I constantly point out, there is no singular idea of what God is that everyone agrees on. God can only be known to exist if you relegate God to an abstract concept, such as the feeling of love or determination. I'm a neo-rationalist. Neo-rationalism is the ultimate extension of philosophy that can't be argued against on any level. There's a big difference between arrogance and being right, and the only way to tell the difference is to doubt all your assumptions; which is what I do. Ilike this idea of neo-rationalism .. but you must admit than when an abstract idea is thought and spoken of it becomes real .. i would recommmend the book 1984 .. read it
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 7:37 pm
Doktor.Mark I am not an anti-creationist. I am a supporter of the idea of creationism. I am a Christian...and I believe that God created us...and loves us...and unfortunately the Devil had to screw up God's Creation's Perfection...so God sent Jesus to take away our sins, so that we might go to heaven. god created the devil i have no sympathy for you .. and heaven is only real to those who believe in it IT's all in your mind ...so is everyone's belief in anything abstract it's a psychological process we all go through
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 5:46 am
Of course I have read 1984! Terrific novel.
Neo-rationalism is simply the only possible rational set of beliefs. One attempts to doubt everything and believe only in that which they can prove. It takes a lot of time, reflection and change as a person, but the end result is that you don't make the sorts of ideological mistakes other people make.
For example, I try to make arguments against people to challenge their beliefs, when those beliefs are illogical. However, whenever someone tries to make an argument to counter what they assume are my beliefs, they fail, because I have no beliefs.
For example, some people might complain that atheism is a religion and that to oppose other religions is hypocrisy. Knowing that the words 'religion' and 'god' are poorly defined, and therefore, by extension, the word 'atheism' is poorly defined, I totally dodge the argument. I simply say that people can label me as they will; I expose the flaws in specific ideas, but not because those ideas are part of a religion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2005 11:02 am
I think there is most likely not a God. People who are atheists and believe that there definitely isn't a god are just as bad as Christians, in my mind. They are putting faith in something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2005 11:50 pm
gigacannon For example, I try to make arguments against people to challenge their beliefs, when those beliefs are illogical. However, whenever someone tries to make an argument to counter what they assume are my beliefs, they fail, because I have no beliefs. So what you mean is that you challenge the reasoning, not the conclusion, right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 12:15 pm
Contingent gigacannon For example, I try to make arguments against people to challenge their beliefs, when those beliefs are illogical. However, whenever someone tries to make an argument to counter what they assume are my beliefs, they fail, because I have no beliefs. So what you mean is that you challenge the reasoning, not the conclusion, right? Not at all. I point out where there is a lack of reasoning. Arguments are never 'flawed'. They are either logical or they are not. I explain to people why they are not logical. I don't ever defend or attack ideas, I simply explain them for as many angles as possible. Once you understand a particular idea, you will automatically know why it is necessarily true, or why it isn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 9:29 pm
Nope, but I kinda because they always get me at, "Then how was the universe created?" All my replies are countered up with, "Because god said so."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 10, 2005 6:32 am
I see no reason to believe in God, therefore I don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 10, 2005 7:34 pm
I do not believe in god, because there is not enough evidence. There are people with very good ideas about god, but i would rather trust centuries of scientific studies than an all powerful being. Sure most scientific theories have not been physicaly proved, most have been proved mathmaticaly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 10, 2005 7:37 pm
Dark Duei Nope, but I kinda because they always get me at, "Then how was the universe created?" All my replies are countered up with, "Because god said so." Exactly, because "god said so" for all optimistic things, and "to punish us for our sins" for all pecimistic things. With these, nothing can be proven, therefore both sides are at a stalemate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 8:13 am
I don't beleive in God per se, but i do beleive there is a power greater than human beings. What is that power? Well, it's definatly not an omnipitent father figure who puts us over his knee and spanks us when we're bad. The "power" is, in my opinion, the power that causes matter to act the way it does. The ingrained program in atoms that causes them to bond, the power that keeps matter and energy constant. It's the law that keeps the universe working in the precise way it needs to. I just don't beleive a system that complex and perfect could have been built by random chance.
So, I don't beleive in the God most religions give us, but I beleive in a God-like power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 4:50 am
gigacannon Contingent So what you mean is that you challenge the reasoning, not the conclusion, right? Not at all. I point out where there is a lack of reasoning. Arguments are never 'flawed'. They are either logical or they are not. I explain to people why they are not logical. There are practically no places where there is no reasoning; even if the reasoning is rarely shown. When one tries to make a logical argument, but there is a fallacy, there is 'flawed logic', isn't there? Quote: I don't ever defend or attack ideas, I simply explain them for as many angles as possible. Once you understand a particular idea, you will automatically know why it is necessarily true, or why it isn't. Attacking an idea, as some people see it, is just explaining the angle of the idea which shows that it's wrong. Anyway, I'm not quite sure about what I was trying to ask then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 5:55 pm
i belive in god because there has been so much evidence on it. i know
some scientific theorys point to dinos existing and in the bible it says nothing about dinosaurs but it said that god created creatures but doesnt
say what they looked like or what the evolved into . ...i know that was off topic but it all leads to the same thing. biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 8:44 pm
... I'm pagan. :3 I believe in and follow multiple gods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 2:05 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[ Eddie Argos ]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/e3/dd/12c5f64517dde3_flip.png?t=1193912030_6.00_00)
