so, you beleive in god? i do,?

Question

but what or who is god? Some theories are, a higher intelligence, some sort of force, or just a simple being. Have you ever really thought about "who, or what" is god. What is your theory, or are you an atheist, beleive there is just no such thing?

Answer 1

I believe what i believe and don't really care what anyone else believes!

Answer 2

No.Not since I was a child.
Read Richard Dawkins's latest best seller "The God Delusion" (Number 1 best seller on Amazon UK, Number 1 on Amazon Canada and Number 2 on Amazon.com USA ) It is an excellent read. If I may quote Sir David Attenborough, Britains most famous living broadcaster and naturalist
"My response is that when Creationists talk about God creating every individual species as a separate act, they always instance hummingbirds, or orchids, sunflowers and beautiful things. But I tend to think instead of a parasitic worm that is boring through the eye of a boy sitting on the bank of a river in West Africa, a worm that's going to make him blind. And I ask them, 'Are you telling me that the God you believe in, who you also say is an all-merciful God, who cares for each one of us individually, are you saying that God created this worm that can live in no other way than in an innocent child's eyeball? Because that doesn't seem to me to coincide with a God who's full of mercy".

Answer 3

Nope, I think we live in a what-you-see-is-what-you-get universe. There may be sh*tty bits, but all and all it's a pretty nice ride.

I wish I were a filmmaker. I'd make a mockumentary about how the first pope made himself god and condemned the original one to live on earth for the remainder of history. I'd have god as a bipolar disheveled little old man living in a cramped grimy apartment in New York. Senile good natured and happy one minute, freaking out and breaking things in a clumsy fury the next. The current pope would issue a fatwa against me, bwahahahaha. :)

Answer 4

I don't believe in a god as such, and will not join or subscribe to another man's religion, I don't believe any of them, and I don't want to worship anything or anyone.
I believe there is/maybe a force that creates and controls events and think it is what some people call "Mother Nature", but I don't want to call it that as that's another mans idea/name.
I see so much politics and jockeying to be in charge or control in every club, church and workplace, I detest every organisation I have ever dealt with, they all smell of jumped up little men (or women).

Answer 5

does it really matter? people place such an emphasis on the existence of god , they use it as the foundation of there ethical and moral basis. if all the people who live a good life to get in to heaven suddleny discovered there was definitley no god would there be anarchy?

We should all be thank full that we are warm and fed . we live in paradise . the most precious thing in this universe is time.

If god exsists or not should make no difference whatsoever. I am grateful for my life. the planet i live on and the people around me.

Answer 6

This question belongs in a Religious Forum, not a Scientific Forum. If you question the existence of God from a scientific standpoint then the answer has to be: "It cannot be proven or disproven. Next question." Also, I use respect when I refer to God. Please notice that I capitalize, if I use god then I am referring to some mythological deity such as Baal.

Answer 7

strange question to be asking in this category. But anyway, I would like to believe that there is something after death, not quite sure but something. However fundamental aspects of the bible for instance are completely ludicrous. I.E. Genesis -- the world was created in 7 days and that life began only 2000 years ago! The earth is 460,000,000,000 years old which has solid proof of its age!

So as much as i want to i can't purely on scientific grounds

Answer 8

I am a totally confused agnostic. While I believe that the complexity of the human probably couldn't have evolved in just a few million years, I find it hard to believe that there is a creater. After all, what came before the creator, and if nothing did, why didn't the creater create the world sooner, if he was alive for infinity years before we were born. Taking that to evolution, why didn't something happen to the universe in the infinate time before us. How did time even start, or was there something always there?

Answer 9

LOGICAL PROOF FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD No. 1.

EVERYTHING THAT EXISTS MUST HAVE A SUFFICIENT EXPLANATION FOR ITS EXISTENCE. NOTHING CAN EXIST WITHOUT A SUFFICIENT REASON FOR ITS EXISTENCE. NOW, OBVIOUSLY THIS SUFFICIENT REASON MUST BE FOUND EITHER IN THE EXISTING THING ITSELF. OR IN THAT WHICH GAVE IT EXISTENCE. TO PUT IT ANOTHER WAY; IF A THING EXISTS THEN EITHER (1). IT IS SO PERFECT THAT IT MUST EXIST AND CANNOT BE NONEXISTENT, OR (2). IT HAS RECEIVED EXISTENCE BY THE ACTION OF SOME EFFICIENT CAUSE.
NOW IF A THING IS SO PERFECT THAT IT MUST EXIST AND CANNOT BE NON-EXISTENT, IT IS SELF EXISTENT. SUCH A THING CONTAINS IN ITSELF THE SUFFICIENT REASON FOR ITS EXISTENCE. AND SINCE IT MUST EXIST BY REASON OF ITS OWN ESSENTIAL PERFECTION, IT HAS HAD NO CAUSE, IT IS ETERNAL; IT IS NECESSARY BEING (i.e. IT NECESSARILY EXISTS), AND IS NOT CONTINGENT UPON THE ACTION OF ANY PRODUCING CAUSE.
IF A THING HAS RECEIVED EXISTENCE BY THE ACTION OF SOME EFFICIENT CAUSE, IT IS NOT A NECESSARY, BUT A CONTINGENT BEING, FOR IT DEPENDS UPON, IS CONTINGENT UPON, THE ACTION OF ITS PRODUCING EFFICIENT CAUSE.

THUS THERE ARE ONLY 2 KINDS OF THING POSSIBLE:
(1). ETERNAL, UNCAUSED, NECESSARY BEING, AND
(2). CONTINGENT BEING, WHICH IS EFFICIENTLY CAUSED.
FURTHER: CONTINGENT THINGS MUST BE TRACED BACK TO A FIRST EFFICIENT CAUSE, WHICH IS ITSELF NECESSARY AND UNCAUSED BEING. FOR CONSIDER: A CONTINGENT THING IS A CAUSED THING, ITS CAUSE PRODUCED IT. IF ITS CAUSE IS ALSO PRODUCED, SOMETHING PRODUCED THAT CAUSE, AND SO ON. IF (A) COMES FROM (B), AND (B) FROM (C), AND (C) FROM (D), AND (D) FROM (E), AND SO ON, THEN SOMEWHERE AND SOMETIME WE MUST COME TO A FIRST CAUSE WHICH IS ITSELF UNCAUSED, WHICH IS NECESSARY BEING. ONE CANNOT TRACE BACK THE CHAIN OF CAUSATION INDEFINITELY NOR TO INFINITY; ONE REALLY MUST REACH THE BEGINNING AT SOME STAGE. TO SAY THAT THE SERIES IS INDEFINITELY LONG AND TO LEAVE THE MATTER THERE, IS TO MAKE AN INTELLECTUAL SURRENDER OF THE WHOLE QUESTION. AN UNWORTHY COP-OUT. SUCH A SURRENDER IS SIMPLY A REFUSAL TO FACE FACTS. ON THE OTHER HAND, TO SAY THAT THE SERIES OF CAUSES IS INFINITELY LONG (i.e. HAS NO BEGINNING) IS TO ASSERT AN ABSURDITY. FOR AN INFINITE NUMBER OF FINITE CAUSES IS IMPOSSIBLE; FINITE ADDED TO FINITE CAN NEVER EQUAL INFINITE. REASON FORCES US TO THE CONCLUSION THAT CONTINGENT THINGS INVOLVE OF NECESSITY THE EXISTENCE OF AN UNCAUSED AND NECESSARY FIRST CAUSE.
NOW, CAN THERE BE MANY UNCAUSED AND NECESSARY FIRST CAUSES? CAN VARIOUS CHAINS OF CAUSATION BE TRACED BACK TO VARIOUS FIRST CAUSES? OR IS THE FIRST CAUSE NECESSARILY ONE CAUSE? IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE FIRST CAUSE IS ONE AND ONLY ONE. FOR A BEING THAT IS SO PERFECT THAT IT MUST EXIST MUST HAVE THE FULNESS OF PERFECTION, IT MUST HAVE PERFECTION IN A WHOLLY UNLIMITED MANNER. WHY? BECAUSE SUCH A BEING IS SELF- EXISTENT AND WHOLLY INDEPENDENT OF CAUSES. CAUSES DO TWO THINGS: THEY MAKE AN EFFECT WHAT IT IS, AND THEY LIMIT THE EFFECT SO AS TO MARK OFF ITS PERFECTIONS FROM THOSE OF OTHER THINGS. HENCE A BEING THAT IS INDEPENDENT OF CAUSES, AS A NECESSARY BEING IS, IS INDEPENDENT OF THE LIMITATION WHICH CAUSES IMPOSE. THUS THE FIRST CAUSE IS FREE FROM LIMITATION; IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS INFINITE. NOW AN INFINITE BEING IS UNIQUE; THERE SIMPLY CANNOT BE MORE THAN ONE SUCH BEING. FOR, IF THERE WERE MORE THAN ONE, THERE WOULD BE A DISTINCTION OF BEING BETWEEN OR AMONG THEM; THIS DISTINCTION WOULD BE ITSELF A LIMITATION, AND SO NONE WOULD BE INFINITE. SUPPOSE, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT THERE ARE ARE TWO INFINITE BEINGS, (A) AND (B). (A) HAS ITS OWN PERFECTIONS IN AN UNLIMITED DEGREE; (B) HAS ITS OWN PERFECTIONS, SIMILARLY UNLIMITED. NOW IF (A) AND (B) ARE NOT IDENTICAL [AND THUS ONE] THERE IS A DEFECT AND A LIMITATION IN (A), INASMUCH AS IT HAS NOT THE PERFECTIONS THAT ARE PROPERLY (B)'s. IN LIKE MANNER THERE IS A DEFECT AND A LIMITATION IN (B), INASMUCH AS (B) HAS NOT THE PERFECTIONS THAT ARE PROPERLY (A)'s. THUS UNLESS (A) AND (B) ARE IDENTICAL AND ONE, NEITHER IS INFINITE. HENCE, THE NECESSARY FIRST CAUSE MUST BE ONE AND INFINITE.

SUMMARY.
CONTINGENT THINGS DEMAND THE EXISTENCE OF ONE, NECESSARY, INFINITE FIRST CAUSE;

NOW THE UNIVERSE, AND ALL THINGS IN THE UNIVERSE, ARE CONTINGENT THINGS;
THEREFORE, THE UNIVERSE, AND ALL THINGS IN THE UNIVERSE, DEMAND THE EXISTENCE OF ONE, NECESSARY. INFINITE FIRST CAUSE.
THIS WE CALL GOD.

Answer 10

Luckily I was not frosted to believe something like this from birth. I don’t believe in God and I am free to do whatever I like. I do have strong morals and I’ a good loving caring person who likes to sacrifice baby’s blood to get the free cup of tea from the blood donation place.

In a way God is comforting and may alleviate the fear of death, a part of our brains dedicated to religious thought just like a part is devoted to vomiting. Cut that part of the brain and you loose all religious beliefs and thoughts.

Answer 11

The question should not be 'Do you believe in god' but 'which God do you believe in'.

As a spiritualist I believe in a personal god. Not one for each person but one that satisfies the beliefs of each personal need.

This negates the need for heaven or hell as a stick and carrot for doing good works but provides the satisfaction for every religion whether it be bhuddist or christian to attain their own enlightenment.