Reasons for God

[Retorth]

The universe can't operate with God if he doesn't exist, and give me some evidence that he exists. Instead of merely asserting that he is required for the universe without actually evidencing that.

I don't understand why you think universes just exist.

Nice side-stepping that landmine.

I know. You say "it came from nothing" or "I don't know - because I don't want to say what I really think". God is required to fill the void your brain creates.

You actually make an interesting point. When humans don't understand something, it is often equated with the supernatural and this, more often then not, meant god. However, discoveries are being made and new knowledge is acquired so often that the logic of god just seems plain redundant.

I think the universe is more than enough evidence of God.

How is it exactly evidence for god? Please do share.

God explains the universe because He is an eternal thinker that could create the universe we experience.

If he indeed created the universe as we know it, I wonder if he is enjoying the suffering he has created. Would you say he is?

God is the critical answer that gives life meaning.

As I was mentioning a little above, when people do not understand something, they equate it to god. After all, how else would you explain something that isn't understood right? However, science is ever-progressing. Once you learn how something works, the need for god becomes redundant.

I believe in giving even when the favor will not be returned (e.g. helping the poor), forgiving people, confronting and settling disputes, and so on.

That is good. I agree with you on this, though it is good to sometimes mind our own business

[Violet]

God explains the universe because He is an eternal thinker that could create the universe we experience. According to you, if your answer isn't nothing, then what is the explanation? Dawkins would say not to ask that question.

God is the critical answer that gives life meaning. Your answer of "I don't know" or "nothing" doesn't give life meaning, it means life is meaningless (except in the meaningless sense).
Well, when you wonder about the meaning of your life you define it in terms that suit you - a life that ends in destruction - free from responsibility.

Justification is the prerequisite for belief. This applies to all beliefs... from our assumed knowledge to our blind trust in the untestable. All of us require our own degrees of justification before we will believe something. Quite personally, I cannot justify trust in something I have had no reason to trust. Anyway, according to the prerequisite for belief... you absolutely must have a reason(s) for why you have placed your trust in this specific entity. It is not unreasonable to ask why you have done so... nor unreasonable to ask what reasons lay your trust.

What makes him so? I know of many completely unrelated things that give life meaning... give it purpose... give it inherent value over the unliving. Our answers of "I'm not quite sure..." and "I don't rightly know..." are honest. We can rarely be 100% correct... this is a limitation which cannot be escaped... and anyone who claims otherwise... is simply arrogant.

Yes, a life that continues the circle with its end... I would not want it any other way. If life did not die, and make way for new life: there would be no new life. Even the greatest tree in the forrest must fall... for else the new seed has no room in which to grow. It is our responsibility as life to die. To do otherwise is to cheat death... and in doing so cheat the life of others. Why should honorable death be anything but the eternal peace of oblivion?

When I consider the meaning of life I define it unselfishly in terms of God - a life that ends in Judgment. I live every day trying to walk the straight and narrow that Jesus described - the only lifestyle that God will have mercy upon and is pleased with... It is a life that is beneficial to mankind as a whole and nature too. I am a friend to the animals and plants, encouraging growth as much as I can...and discouraging evil and waste, which is a hindrance to growth. I believe in giving even when the favor will not be returned (e.g. helping the poor), forgiving people, confronting and settling disputes, and so on. These are the lessons of the Bible - they support true growth, growth that will last and not turn sour.

It is statements like this quote... that show just how much hypocrisy and mistaken ideals thrive within this religion. So easy it is... to think we are right. So simple it is... to think we help. So laughable it is... to assume either is true. How is the bold not selfish of you, and how arrogant and egotistical one must be to believe it. How fantastic a friend... he who eats his friends. How discouraging of evil... he who worships a manifestation of egoism and arrogance. How giving a man... he who expects to be repaid. This italic is the true face of the Bible... the face of inequality and injustice. And this goes far deeper than the cover of the book.

[ecolox]

It is statements like this quote... that show just how much hypocrisy and mistaken ideals thrive within this religion. So easy it is... to think we are right. So simple it is... to think we help. So laughable it is... to assume either is true. How is the bold not selfish of you, and how arrogant and egotistical one must be to believe it. How fantastic a friend... he who eats his friends. How discouraging of evil... he who worships a manifestation of egoism and arrogance. How giving a man... he who expects to be repaid. This italic is the true face of the Bible... the face of inequality and injustice. And this goes far deeper than the cover of the book.

How is it selfish to give with no guarantee of being repaid?

---

The universe can't operate with God if he doesn't exist, and give me some evidence that he exists. Instead of merely asserting that he is required for the universe without actually evidencing that.

I don't understand why you think universes just exist.

Nice side-stepping that landmine.

I can't prove God exists. I believe the world would benefit from reverence to God, however, so perhaps my efforts are just an indication that "I care".

[Edwardo Piet]

To give life to the universe perhaps, unless you think nothing did it?

False dichotomy. Why does it have to be God or nothing at all? Why can't something spark creation off, or something simpler be there originally, rather than a supernatural Creator, a Deity, "God" doing it or being there originally?

How come God is exempt from explanation? Isn't a singularity + God more complex than a singularity?

I ask how God is required, not how a cause is required. It's a fallacy of False Dichotomy to say it's either God or it's not caused at all. If you play it that way, you get the answer you want in a single step. Unfortunately for you, it's a fallacious one because it's false dichotomy.

I don't understand why you think universes just exist.

I don't. But I don't understand why you think God just exists.

I'm saying that by your reasoning I could just as easily posit the universe existing all along instead of God, or, IOW, I could posit a singularity like the Big Bang - or even just the laws of physics themselves. What makes you think you can get away with God just being there from the begining?

I'm saying the universe could exist as a simple singularity and then expanded, or it could have a singularity as a cause. What makes you think that the complexity of a Supernatural Creator, of "God", is required in this matter? Why does it have to be God existing at the beginning, or non-temporally, why does he have to be the creator? It's more parsimonious the cut-out the middle man is it not? If you fail to give evidence as to why "God" makes matters any easier.

I know. You say "it came from nothing" or "I don't know - because I don't want to say what I really think". God is required to fill the void your brain creates.

1. I never said it came for nothing.

2. I indeed don't know the very deepest origin of the universe, nor does anyone to my knowledge, even the top scientists are still working on it and even they may never know,.

3. '1.' and '2.' are not the same thing. As for '2.' I don't know because there's no evidence that I know of of the exact beginning origins right from he start...as for '.1' that's a claim I never made, that I couldn't possibly know, and doesn't even appear to make any sense.

I think the universe is more than enough evidence of God.

You can think what you want but it doesn't make it so. How is it evidence whatsoever? I ask what the evidence is, and you say "The universe" or IOW, "everything", oh, very helpful(!)

What are you actually talking about?

Strawman. I didn't expect evolution to do something it isn't supposed to, but evolution is incomplete in what it is supposed to explain.

I don't think it is a Strawman. Did you not say that Evolution fails to explain life? Because it's not supposed to...that's what I mean't by you expecting it to do something that it isn't supposed to. Because it isn't 'incomplete' by not explaining life, because that's not what evolution is about. Evolution is about how life evolves, it's not about how life originally got here, it's not supposed to explain life itself.

I didn't say evolution is supposed to explain everything, so there isn't much point in jabbering on about that.

And did I say you said that? I believe I just read that you said that it is incomplete because it doesn't explain life...and it's not supposed to because that's not what evolution is about. I don't believe I ever said that you said it's supposed to explain everything??

...and what about God? How does he explain it? He doesn't: Because he's just asserted as an explanation, and an explanation isn't an explanation if it's just a completely unwarranted baseless assertion.

God explains the universe because He is an eternal thinker that could create the universe we experience.

Circular reasoning. You can't use him as an eternal thinker to explain him who is an eternal thinker. Explain how he can even exist, and exist as an 'eternal thinker', instead of just asserting he exists because he is an eternal thinker. Asserting that barely doesn't explain a thing.

How can you use him existing as an eternal thinker to explain he exists?? You have to explain that he exists first.

According to you, if your answer isn't nothing, then what is the explanation? Dawkins would say not to ask that question.

I don't know the answer of where the universe comes from - I've already told you that - and neither do you: You don't know either - or I sincerely doubt it: You just say you know. How can you?

Admitting that we don't know, or we don't know at least yet, is better than pretending to have the answer to the question when we don't. Admitting to not know is better than a fallacious answer.

Any explanation is not logically better than no explanation, that's fallacious reasoning: A non-sequitur.

A fallacious explanation is, well, fallacious. So how is that "better" than admitting you don't know when you don't? If you don't know then it's correct to say you don't: What good does it do, on the other hand, do base your entire argument on fallacious reasoning?

God is the critical answer that gives life meaning. Your answer of "I don't know" or "nothing" doesn't give life meaning, it means life is meaningless (except in the meaningless sense).

That's your opinion and also entirely irrelevant to the truth of the matter of whether God exists or not.

Well, when you wonder about the meaning of your life you define it in terms that suit you - a life that ends in destruction - free from responsibility.

I take responsibility for my life rather than basing it on what "God" wants. And...how does me not believing in God remotely prevent me from being responsible?

When I consider the meaning of life I define it unselfishly in terms of God - a life that ends in Judgment.

This is all your own subjective opinion of what is meaning, your own aesthetics.

I can care about people, I can be unselfish, without God. So where's your evidence that you can only be moral with God?

I find the world inspiring to live in. So where is your evidence that there can be no meaning without God?

I live every day trying to walk the straight and narrow that Jesus described - the only lifestyle that God will have mercy upon and is pleased with... It is a life that is beneficial to mankind as a whole and nature too.

Being a good person and living a good life in general is beneficial to mankind...whether you're a believer or non-believer in God.

I believe in giving even when the favor will not be returned (e.g. helping the poor), forgiving people, confronting and settling disputes, and so on.

Me too. I can care without God, believing in him doesn't give you special powers of kindness. If it did, then how come non-religious people can give a shit?

These are the lessons of the Bible - they support true growth, growth that will last and not turn sour.

They're obvious to anyone who cares, religious person or irreligious person.

You say everything needs an explanation, but what you mean is...everything except God! You refuse to explain God! Why?

Everything that we can see/experience-first-hand especially needs an explanation. We cannot gather evidence about God in the same way that we can gather evidence about the universe. God is one step beyond...or so.

I could just as easily say that the universe was at the beginning, and was a 'step beyond' so didn't need evidence, and so "God" wouldn't be required. How does the extra complexity of a deity help deal with the universe? If the universe has origins at some form of singularity, or the laws of physics themselves, or whatever started that - How does God make the issue any easier?

You are committing the special pleading fallacy, it's fallacious reasoning on your part. You have got no excuse to demand that God doesn't need an explanation and can "Go beyond" and that the universe does and can't.

God is eternal - and unexplainable.

I could just as easily say that the origins of the universe in secular terms, without a deity, are "unexplainable", I could suggest the notion that the origin of the very origin of the laws of physics themselves may never be able to be explained by science: I could say that was out of reach and unexplainable. Why is the complexity of a deity needed? Your reasoning is fallacious: You are special pleading God as the only thing that doesn't require an explanation, without logically justifying that.

EvF

[Violet]

How is it selfish to give with no guarantee of being repaid?

That you do not expect physical repayment is good. That you do not follow the eye-for-an-eye philosophy of the old testament is also good.

That you give only because you expect to be lavished in an afterlife...? You expect eternal happiness in heaven, do you not? And by following "Christ's Path" you will attain such. The question becomes this: are you giving to follow Christ into heaven...? Or are you giving out of goodness?

[ecolox]

How is it selfish to give with no guarantee of being repaid?

That you do not expect physical repayment is good. That you do not follow the eye-for-an-eye philosophy of the old testament is also good.

That you give only because you expect to be lavished in an afterlife...? You expect eternal happiness in heaven, do you not? And by following "Christ's Path" you will attain such. The question becomes this: are you giving to follow Christ into heaven...? Or are you giving out of goodness?

Lavished in an afterlife, no - earn my keep, yes. What is wrong with my thinking, through faith - with no evidential guarantee, that I can earn good by being good. It wouldn't be fair for me to give, give, give and never receive anything for my work. I expect no repayment on earth, and I do not publicize specifically what it is that I do - in hopes of receiving earthly praise or rewards. God says that I will be repaid, and I think that is fair. Through faith I will continue to give.

---

1. I never said...

None of these avenues that I've tried make sense, you're right.

I can care about people, I can be unselfish, without God. So where's your evidence that you can only be moral with God?

You bring up a good point, so I have abandoned all the points I was pushing. Now I think it makes more sense to say that empathy is a good basis for believing in God.

You conceded that being moral doesn't make sense (you can't prove that murder is wrong). You do it because "you care". God is a possible explanation of our existence, and because I care I choose Him. God will treat everyone fairly. Those that don't care don't have to, but they will not be joined with those that do - that's hell, I think.

I find the world inspiring to live in. So where is your evidence that there can be no meaning without God?

You enjoy driving down a dead end road where u-turns are illegal?

Being a good person and living a good life in general is beneficial to mankind...whether you're a believer or non-believer in God.

Yes, but I don't believe that's really possible without faith. An ebb and flow is possible - giving and receiving, but I believe faith is the only way to bring on a tidal wave of good.

Me too. I can care without God, believing in him doesn't give you special powers of kindness. If it did, then how come non-religious people can give a shit?

Because the non-religious receive repayment for the good they do, because they have plenty of support from people around them. I have real trouble believing they could go the extra mile without faith, ignorance, or insanity. I think you are making a mistake about how much you care. It's easy to think you are good when your life is good. It's easy to give when you've got plenty. A good person gives when they have nothing - when everything they have has been taken. How could you understand that you are good?

How does God make the issue any easier?

Faith makes it possible to be unfairly good - being good amidst evil. When the world is beating people down, the natural reaction is to fight, lash out, or run away and give up...not to give. Faith allows believers to overcome. Now, if I were you I wouldn't judge faith by the way most "Christian" people act...most of them probably don't have much faith at all, so they are hardly able to beat their circumstances and be good examples.

[Amphora]

Are you a good person because you want to be, or are you good to please off God?

[ecolox]

Are you a good person because you want to be, or are you good to please off God?

Rephrasing: do I want to be good because I want to be, or because God wants me to be?

It must be because God wants me to be...I don't think I could do it on my own without faith.

[Darwinian]

Then how do people without faith manage it so easily?

[ecolox]

Then how do people without faith manage it so easily?

They may manage an "ebb and flow", as I mentioned, but I believe that is the best they can do. The world needs more than that though...anyone could see that. Those who are aware and do not take the steps to do more are guilty. It would be like watching a child drowning and doing nothing to help.