Why Believe in a god?

Ben Masada

New member
I'm struggling to be as clear as can be here. Is a person who rapes and murders children evil? Is raping and murdering children evil? Yes or no. Anybody.

No, but sick. Psychologically sick. Evil is a permanent condition that affects the attribute of Freewill. If the attribute of Freewill is removed from a man, he can no longer be liable or punished for his wrongdoings. Sick yes, he can be treated of his condition or being removed by euthanasia in case he proceeds with ill-using his Freewill to practice evil. No one is born evil. He becomes by going through many moral distortions.
 

Prizebeatz1

New member
Well why NOT believe in God? We can experience what is infinite and external for ourselves. I've done it and others can do the same if they are willing. The only problem is most people don't know how.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
 

Tyrathca

New member
Is a child rapist/murderer evil, yes or censored no.
Yes because it is morally reprehensible, arising from bad character, causing discomfort, repulsion and harm.

Then again if I were to follow the examples of the old testament I'd have to conclude it wasn't. Since there are fairly lax excuses in it for rape being OK (like having trouble finding a wife). Does that mean the bible is evil?... :chuckle:

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
 

Tyrathca

New member
Well why NOT believe in God?
Because it doesn't appear to be true.
We can experience what is infinite and external for ourselves. I've done it and others can do the same if they are willing. The only problem is most people don't know how.
The question then arises, what is your experience representative of? Is it experiencing an external stimulus or is it all (quite literally) all in your head? An experience brought about by your neurology rather than your theology.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
 

Ktoyou

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Well why NOT believe in God? We can experience what is infinite and external for ourselves. I've done it and others can do the same if they are willing. The only problem is most people don't know how.
What is so interesting about that? Seems I watched the in an old Arnold Schwarzenegger movie
 

Tyrathca

New member
It does appear that an intelligent authority is the cause.
Based on your continual faulty assumption that if you think something looks designed then that means it was designed and not only that designed by an omniscient omnipotent being who is obsessed with the sexual activities of one of its hairless ape creations. That or your assumption that if evolution (or physics, geology, archeology, etc) hasn't explained something perfectly yet then therefore creationism is right (the "we don't have an explanation there we have an explanation" chestnut)

When you have a logical objective test that "an intelligent authority" caused anything let me know and we'll start to apply it rigorously. :)
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
Based on your continual faulty assumption that if you think something looks designed then that means it was designed and not only that designed by an omniscient omnipotent being who is obsessed with the sexual activities of one of its hairless ape creations. That or your assumption that if evolution (or physics, geology, archeology, etc) hasn't explained something perfectly yet then therefore creationism is right (the "we don't have an explanation there we have an explanation" chestnut)

When you have a logical objective test that "an intelligent authority" caused anything let me know and we'll start to apply it rigorously. :)
I guess we'll find out AFTER we die, huh? Do you believe that we die and that's it? No more knowing anything or afterlife of any kind?
 

Tyrathca

New member
I guess we'll find out AFTER we die, huh?
Only if our mind persists after death. If not I'll never know I was right.
Do you believe that we die and that's it? No more knowing anything or afterlife of any kind?
Yes. The mind is something inescapably tied to the structure and function of the brain. Alter the brain and you alter the mind, completely destroy a part of the brain and that part of the mind ceases to function. There is little reason to believe that if this occurs to the whole brain this is somehow different to part of it.

Could I be wrong? Of course. This is an untestable question. But the problem of brain-mind link leads me to think that even if something does persist of me after death it would be almost unrecognisable as my "mind", before death most people's minds undergo a gradual damage and decay over hours, days or years which can drastically alter a person's personality and thinking. What then persists? Is it the mind that is there at death (i.e. not much/nothing) is it the mind shortly before death? (which for a sudden death might be recognisable as "me" but for a slow one would leave my remanent a "me" in name only - if it even knows my name still) or it the mind many years prior? (in which case what becomes of the more recent "me" that may have had distinct difference because of altered neurology?). Or maybe it's some as yet undescribed amalgamation of all versions of my across my lifespan (me as a child merging with me as an adult merging with me [hopefully] as an elderly).

Do I like this answer? No. I dislike the idea of my life having a "time limit" but I don't decide how the universe works, I just have to be thankful I existed at all. Al so note that the existence or nonexistence of an afterlife is separate from the question of the existence of a god. There could be a god/s and they have created no afterlife for us, or there could be no god/s and yet there is an afterlife emergent from the properties of the universe (not something I believe and it sounds weird and unlikely but it's not impossible, science fiction has some nice "what if" ideas)

(Apologies if this was a bit rambling or confusing)
 

annabenedetti

like marbles on glass
Do I like this answer? No. I dislike the idea of my life having a "time limit" but I don't decide how the universe works, I just have to be thankful I existed at all. Al so note that the existence or nonexistence of an afterlife is separate from the question of the existence of a god. There could be a god/s and they have created no afterlife for us, or there could be no god/s and yet there is an afterlife emergent from the properties of the universe (not something I believe and it sounds weird and unlikely but it's not impossible, science fiction has some nice "what if" ideas)

(Apologies if this was a bit rambling or confusing)

Not at all rambling or confusing. My undergraduate (I'll be graduating in May) field of study is psychology so these are concepts I grapple with frequently. As a fallen-away Catholic I grapple with them even more. One thing I'd like to bring up to you is that if one were to believe there was a soul, one wouldn't necessarily see it as interchangeable with mind. So, in a religious belief, the deterioration of the mind wouldn't mean the deterioration of the soul.

Even though I'm non-practicing, it did hurt to see these words in an article I read recently:

"But as a neuroscientist and psychologist, I have no use for the soul."

It's here: Neuroscience and psychology have rendered it basically unnecessary to have a soul
 

Tyrathca

New member
One thing I'd like to bring up to you is that if one were to believe there was a soul, one wouldn't necessarily see it as interchangeable with mind. So, in a religious belief, the deterioration of the mind wouldn't mean the deterioration of the soul.
An interesting thought which I have heard in other forms before. The problem I find with it is that I then have to wonder what this soul is and if it continues would I identify with it in any way? For example my right pinky is a part of me but if it were somehow preserved into infinity I wouldn't consider that an afterlife, given I identify "me" so much with my mind I'm not sure I would treat my "soul" any differently to my pinky.

Even though I'm non-practicing, it did hurt to see these words in an article I read recently:

"But as a neuroscientist and psychologist, I have no use for the soul."

It's here: Neuroscience and psychology have rendered it basically unnecessary to have a soul
An interesting read and it summarises my problems with the idea of the soul perfectly. Everything I identify with being "me" can be tied back to the physical brain at least in some way whether I like it or not. If the soul is a real thing then I haven't the faintest idea what it would do that I would care about if it survived my death, I doubt I would recognise it if I could perceive it.

I liked the final line "there is nothing left for the soul to do".
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
An interesting thought which I have heard in other forms before. The problem I find with it is that I then have to wonder what this soul is and if it continues would I identify with it in any way? For example my right pinky is a part of me but if it were somehow preserved into infinity I wouldn't consider that an afterlife, given I identify "me" so much with my mind I'm not sure I would treat my "soul" any differently to my pinky.

An interesting read and it summarises my problems with the idea of the soul perfectly. Everything I identify with being "me" can be tied back to the physical brain at least in some way whether I like it or not. If the soul is a real thing then I haven't the faintest idea what it would do that I would care about if it survived my death, I doubt I would recognise it if I could perceive it.

I liked the final line "there is nothing left for the soul to do".

This is simply corporeal monism . . which is paganism.
 

annabenedetti

like marbles on glass
An interesting thought which I have heard in other forms before. The problem I find with it is that I then have to wonder what this soul is

The question is unanswerable by science, that's the problem. To me, the closest, most tantalizing, but as-yet unprovable proof of a soul is the idea of a near-death experience. If there was a way to prove movement of the mind/soul to a vantage point in another dimension, NDEs seem to offer the most promise.

and if it continues would I identify with it in any way? For example my right pinky is a part of me but if it were somehow preserved into infinity I wouldn't consider that an afterlife, given I identify "me" so much with my mind I'm not sure I would treat my "soul" any differently to my pinky.

I don't think that's a working comparison. Not trying to argue the point so much as how you're getting there.

An interesting read and it summarises my problems with the idea of the soul perfectly. Everything I identify with being "me" can be tied back to the physical brain at least in some way whether I like it or not. If the soul is a real thing then I haven't the faintest idea what it would do that I would care about if it survived my death, I doubt I would recognise it if I could perceive it.

I liked the final line "there is nothing left for the soul to do".

Glad you found it interesting. :e4e:
 

Tyrathca

New member
This is simply corporeal monism . . which is paganism.
And your point being? Do your labels make it easier for you to dismiss my concerns without considering them?

Although to call an atheist a pagan is stretching the already broad definition a little to far.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
 

Ben Masada

New member
Well why NOT believe in God? We can experience what is infinite and external for ourselves. I've done it and others can do the same if they are willing. The only problem is most people don't know how.

When we know God we don't have to believe in Him. To believe is for those who walk by faith and not by sight. (II Cor. 5:7) To walk by sight is to walk with understanding. To walk by faith which was what Paul demanded of his followers, it is because he wanted them to leave the understanding with him.
 

Nihilo

BANNED
Banned
It is reasonable to think that everything was created by a higher intelligence.
On His cross the Lord said, "Father Forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Lk23:34KJV), because even though they were murdering Him, He still loves all His creatures and His creation, exactly as we love our loved ones, and as our loved ones love us, except perfectly. There is no such thing as random goodness, all goodness is from God, and "random" goodness that happens to you is not random but from God. There is random bad luck, but God permits it, but He does not execute it. We can prepare for random bad luck. We have to address certain safety issues is all, like do your brakes work. Nothing unreasonable. 1st Corinthians 2:8 KJV
 
Top