The posit that agnostics are fence straddlers awaiting an appearance of a god(s) is incorrect and could be taken by many as an insult.

An agnostic simply is honest in stating that they do not hold to belief in any god or theology because they haven't seen evidence to support it. That doesn't make them fence straddlers any more than someone who hadn't sailed around the world before Columbus, but doubted the widespread thought that the earth was flat (yes I know that was not universal, but it was common among the largely uneducated). Otherwise, they relied upon reason lacking complete evidence. I contend that this is a logical and acceptable position for many.

I do not criticize those who describe themselves as atheists and would expect that they not attack my agnosticism. My personal thought trends more to the atheist view, but as one who has not dedicated my life to the varied physical sciences or theologies necessary to give a definitive answer, I am content with calling myself agnostic.

The evidence I have seen points to evolutionary process and not some externally controlled and planned process. If someone actually planned the mess we call existence they have a lot of explaining to do.

A belief in god is the ultimate placebo- a sugar pill that can do anything, be anything, requires no rational explanation, doesn't require proof of consistent and verifiable effectiveness, etc.

Some may wish to stake their lives on a spiritual sugar pill but I choose not to. The evidence is just not there scientifically, philosophically, anecdotally or otherwise.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If your morals come from a god and you suddenly become an atheist, stay away from me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The other day I visited a planetarium. The presentation was very moving, and it brought myself and other viewers from our seats in the planetarium to the farthest reaches of the universe our science can take us today. I remember thinking, "It's so massive, how can we even contemplate it." The universe we live in is so huge as to make the word "huge" seem so impotent a word to even explain it. And the author of this piece is correct in saying that the universe is also so small that even a highly respected and learned scientist in the subject matter can barely grasp that concept.

I have no reason to doubt the author's idea about how God or gods were created. I've often thought the same thing myself. But I disagree with the assertion that there is a black-and-white choice of no answer or a fake one. That depends on the kind of person you are, I suppose. I contend that there are lots of little answers along the way if we study what we know to be true about the universe. In other words, if we pay attention to the physical world around us. Maybe as I learn more, I will understand more.

I admit that the vastness of space stresses me out because I don't understand it. I don't understand where space "ends." Everything is so material to us in our world that not knowing the beginning and end of something is difficult to wrap our heads around. But the not knowing and the vastness also give me comfort. Some things are beyond my comprehension at the moment. Some things will always be beyond my ability to comprehend them. I will never know everything. And I'm OK with that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

no explanation is necessary.

For those who don't - no explanation is possible.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is no God...there is no you! Since no one here is self-existent, the whole idea of there being no creator, is vanity and childishness. The fool has said in his heart there is no God. There is nothing that exists but that it exists only through the sovereign will of the creator, God the Father of all life. If you still don't believe in God, just hold your breath for twenty minutes and then you will know for sure.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What is morality? It's something without which a society of gregarious beasts cannot be formed. If my safety depends upon your presence and willingness to act on my behalf, I want to keep you nearby and willing to act on my behalf, perhaps even selflessly. If I have just shown the selfishness of my genes by engaging in procreation with your mate, you will be disinclined to act on my behalf. That's morality.

What is spirituality? It's a little something that we all experience with a sense not of the known five. To dismiss senses six through n because we do not yet have a scientific method to detect them is to deny our own personal experience. We don't have a name for it, but we all know it's there. I know when my wife is distressed even when she's not in my presence, animals sense approaching storms and even earthquakes -- should we be surprised that we sometimes experience things we cannot concretely identify? I think not. I think that's spirituality, and I think it has nothing to do with invisible space daddies. Why invent an invisible space daddy when "Gee, I don't know why this is but it's pretty freakin' cool!" will work?

Why are there atheists? Why, obviously, it's because some of us don't make up things to explain our spiritual moments. We just accept them, and revel in them, and don't necessarily seek to explain them. Sometimes being is good enough in and of itself.

Why deities? Social control. Without a common myth, society is much harder to create and maintain. Those who benefit most from society (the wealthy) are wholly dependent upon the presence of a common mythology. Why is America industrious? Puritan work ethic. What if there had been no Puritans? We'd have no cell phones and would have to satisfy ourselves with tasty meals cooked over wood fires and the presence of our mates and progeny. Those who satisfy themselves with such simple things seem to be happier than we with cell phones and careers and cable television... and our rulers are materially much, much wealthier than theirs.

Why are we willing to kill and die for our belief in some deity? Because our society conditions us to believe that martyrdom is noble. If our society instead conditioned us to believe that public masturbation was the key to our continued safety, there'd be no war... but messy sidewalks. Myself, I'd prefer the messy sidewalks of public masturbation to those of phosphorous bombs, but I'm not one to accept conditioning.

I could be wrong.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nice piece with some good points but it needs editing.

BTW, speaking as an atheist, everything makes sense my way. I CAN grasp what we know so far about the 'universe." Also I see the evils caused by religions and man's belief in supernatural anythings he creates.

Check out Who's Who in Hell sometime- a huge reference tome. It is my "bible" of sorts. Makes me laugh.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

God is just a Santa for the needy... people must learn to think for themselves and face-up to the real world issues.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As someone who moved from atheism to belief in God, I found the article interesting. However, I didn't really see myself in it.

Belief in God is certainly not a placebo for me. In fact, I often struggle with my faith, though I always return convinced about God.

I find the thesis that God functions as an explanation in a confusing world to be a bit out of date. It may happen, but it doesn't seem to me to be a major reason for the large variety of religions around the world.

For me, my belief came about through personal subjective experience. I also find the story of Jesus to be inspiring and convincing. I must admit that the Old Testament often bothers me in its violence.

I don't have an answer that will satisfy most readers of AlterNet. It doesn't have to. It only needs to satisfy me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HUH?: if there is no god where does morality come from?

This must be the dumbest most uninformed illogical discussions I can have imagined on the "topic" of god.

It's almost 100% entirely a tissue of prejudice, stereotype, and trial by accusation. Almost completely absent of fact. But this question of morality has to be the dumbest. Given a species which is defined as social and cultural, how could it exist without morality: rules standards norms and shared values. Humans as a biological species are by definition moral. That is what culture consists of. No morality means no Google, no Wrigley's chewing gum, no coffee for breakfast, no breakfast.

Imagine a football match, then try to take out all the rules. What is left. NOTHING. It is the rules which make it a football game. Football certainly is not about pheromones.

OK. That solves the question of the existence of morality.

Now the universal experience of humans which in English we call "god."

Aristotle never mentions 'god' in his Ethics or in his Poetics. Universally humans experience human existence in the context of a community. There is in every human something called recognition, empathy, compassion. Without it human society is impossible. Compassion, empathy, recognition are neurological functions absolutely necessary to human functioning. We would not exist, could not function without them. Babies literally die solely from lack of social interaction: called 'failure to survive' in technical medical jargon.

"God" is one culture's word for it. That experience of self as embedded in reality greater than the ephemera of what I am at just this moment: commonality and continuity of self. The experience of still being me even though I am no longer in high school, no longer in college, no longer a virgin, no longer able to believe in politics or the Michelin Guide. "I" persists even through Nixon, Reagan, 2 Bushes, and Monica Lewinsky, I am still I.

Other cultures call it different names. That universal experience of elation, continuity, compassion, understanding, wisdom. All cultures have explanations of it. It is a universal human experience: think of Beethoven's later quartets, Shakespeare's Tempest, poems by Basho, the basic law of the 6 Nations, the League of the Iroquois, or a Zen story. Thelonius Monk and diggereedoo, Planck's Philosophy of Physics and Newton's calculus. Elation is a real emotion with defined neurological parameters. Everyone experiences it: basic human universal experiences are named and explained by cultures universally.

Arguing about the "existence" of god is like arguing about how good chocolate tastes. It's like arguing over what is the 'purpose' of sex. It's like telling people blow jobs are unnatural. Who cares how unnatural a good blow job is and who cares that you can't prove god exists.

I love blow jobs, vanilla ice cream, god, and NPR. Now "prove" me wrong.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I see evidence of God every day, in every moment. This moment. My own question has never been, "Why do people believe in God?", but rather, "Why don't more people believe in God?".

I am a Christian. This is not, for me, to signal that God dwells in a book. The World is alive. The Holy Spirit dwells all about us. We are never alone, and yet, we do face this World on our own, in part. We are given challenges. Life is Challenge. This is neither good, nor bad, it simply is.

Look around you. Everything in this World lives and dies. Everything. Even Willow trees have had a beginning, and will have an end. Everything eats something else, and, in that consumption, some beings are destroyed, their parts divided, absorbed, spat out.

Some beings are not destroyed in the consumption, but live on, change their hosts,and, together, become something new, something which continues on in a dramatically new way. Simply look at mitochondria.

This World, this Universe is a wonderous, unfathomable place. and, THIS is where people of faith, and people without faith, both lose their way; they disagree. They believe that the World, the Universe IS fathomable. Some wish to simply break this wonderous existance down into protons and neutrons, electrons and quarks. Always having to refine, redefine, reorganize, backtrack, and invent, because... there is always something new. There is always something inexplicable, and there always will be.

While, Some, some, people of Faith simply say... "God did it", but then close their eyes to the beauty, to the wonder, of this creation, and persecute those who would know more. Understanding is our keen.

But we have free will. God did give us intellect, and reason, and with this comes great responsibility. As we have seen... it is within our ability to Destroy this Earth, this ever so beautiful creation.

The Battle between Good and Evil, better God and Satan has never been so apparent as it is now. Driven by both Greed and Hubris, We are laying waste to ALL life on Earth. We are replacing the mystery of Creation with the creed of consumption, and laying waste to the Earth in the name of profit.

We spawn wars to fuel our cars, destroy the ozone, destroy our children's children's future all in the name of personal power and the convenience of touch tone dialing. We have been lied to. This way is NOT better. Not at all!

We have a choice. Obliterate the Earth, or step back from the brink. Take stock of our situation. Accept that a great many sacrifices must be made, and embrace this Creation.

The choice is ours. Whether you believe in God, or not, each and every one of us is involved in this choice. Each and every one of us will inherit the consequences.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic
(absorbs heat) ?

Most students write proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law (gas cools when it
expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant.

One student, however, wrote the following:

First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know
the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I
think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave.
Therefore, no souls are leaving.

As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that
exist in the world today. Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of
their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and
since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls
go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls
in Hell to increase exponentially.

Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states
that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume
of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added.

This gives us two possibilities:

1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then
the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.

2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the
temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.

So which is it? If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my
Freshman year that, "it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you", and take
into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number 2 must be true,
and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over.

The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not
accepting any more souls and it is therefore, extinct...leaving only Heaven thereby
proving the existence of a divine being which explains why last night, Teresa kept
shouting "Oh my God."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

1. God is all-powerful.
2. God is good.
3. Bad things happen.

Therefore there is no god.

If #3 is true, then #1 & #2 are false.
If #1 & #2 are true, then #3 is false.

If all three are true, then all the bad things that happen are really good.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What we also should consider is our common bonds not only within our own societies, but within the sphere upon which we live, and the solar system in which we spin and the galaxy within which we ride and the Universe/Multiverse in which we all exist together.

The fact is we are all made of the same materials-and that means all of us from the tiniest microbe to the Blue Whales, from the core of the Earth to the smallest atomic particles. We are also vibrant, energetic beings. Yes, that applies to the categories listed above as well.

As energy pulses through our universe, it also pulses through us all. This link, this electrodynamic force flows through everything and everyone. There are people that are more in touch with this energy flow and this gives them a greater and broader view of the life we live, allowing them to see more than others see as well.

Is this what spirituality is? I think it has a lot to do with our perception of there being something 'greater' than ourselves. But, that in itself isn't the only explanation either. In something as vast and complex as the universe that we exist in, it would seem that sentient beings who develop along the way would not just expire upon the death of their physical selves, what they have learned, experienced and gained from their lives would want to gather into another plane of existence, thus enriching the universe itself.

This applies to every living creature too. I don't need to read a study from Harvard to know that many animals practice moral behavior within their social groups, knowing the difference between what is accepted as right and wrong by their peers. It's certainly not a human's only club.

This applies to the concept of love and grief as well. One afternoon, I went to my brother's house and discovered that he had shot an owl. The dead owl was in the driveway while overhead, its mate circled, screeching the most horrible sound I've ever heard from a bird. That poor owl circled for at least 90-minutes making the sound of utter heartbreak, and I couldn't have been more upset with my brother. Owls mate for life, and the death of this owl's mate was so horrifying to witness that I hope to never have to see it again.

If you want to see a movie that shows a fairly good take on some of this point of view, watch "Defending Your Life." The whole point of existence in the movie is to continue to learn, continue to grow, continue to experience love, empathy, romance, food, sex, family, and to learn why these things make us better and happier (and smarter).

Of course, the idea that we are all connected at the atomic level is nothing new...it's just recently that we could identify what an atom is in relation to us. Cool.

Bryan Galt's Blog

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Okay, I get it: athiests think people of faith are silly and irrational.

Unless you can think of something new to add, can we please stop beating this dead horse and get back to progressive politics?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Its a pity people cant see they have been conditioned to NOT see the go(o)d in themselves....because this would make them stronger than they could ever be believing in an unseen inconstant god that the earliest leaders devised in order to control them. There is one LAW (lord) there is none beside me I make the good, I create the evil etc. One atom touches another causing action/reaction, same with words & deeds. Personal responsibility spells we should weed our garden (mind)of seeds we dont want growing in our life. When you understand this you see how religion was based on facts & spun. Base any lie on facts & you fool the masses.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have not participated in Any organized religion, nor followed any particular theology in over 3 decades. In fact was a proclaimed Atheist for the majority of that time, until the last several years. Perhaps things happened earlier, but I didn't begin to notice 'little blessings' which touched my life until after my dad died suddenly. Funny things began almost immediately.Heading to a funeral home to make arrangements, my sister said she had this nagging feeling that she wwanted to contact another funeral home that started with an "M", but had no idea why. As we went to leave for th emeeting the phone rang, it was a friend of my dads who owned a funeral home, Munsons Funeral home, and he asked us to make no decisions until we talked to him. The home which had my fathers body was 'French Provencial'- far to prissy for my dad. Munsons was more like a cabin, more 'manly'. Perfect, not to mention he would float the costs until his estate was settled (at far better rate).My sister told the pastor my dad was a combo of Fred Flintstone & Jackie Gleason. At the luncheon, th eFlintstones was on TV when we came in. Weeks Later a Stuffed 'Fred' was being tossed in the air at my sisters church.2003, How many kids still watch the Flintstones? The bizzare occurances continued.
In '05 I bought a pregnant mare for a 'song'because of a fluke situation.She produced exactly what I hoped for, A beautiful big moving Bay colt. He is now ready for sale and could bring in about 50,000- which would help us out of our mounting bills or possible forclosure. I consider him a gift, not just form my Dad, but whatever it is that makes such 'Prayers' come true.
It is not the huge 'Miracles' which shape my new faith (like the Election of Pres Obama- a Huge Miracle), but the small mandane 'surprises' which give us a helping hand now and again.
I still do not particpate in any organized religion, nor consider myself a follower of any Doctrine. Mostly due to the fact many are willing to kill or die for their dogmas, while ignoring the simple 'Rules'. It is not for God they do these things, but the 'supremacy' of their own particualr Sacred Cows, Idols.
Beyond that, whether it be a'god' or some crazy freak of nature, we are the ONLY species on the planet (or thus far in our galaxy) which has the ability to perform the duties of Stewardship, and therefore the Sole bearers of this responsiblity and Honor.
so do I Beleive in 'God' it depends on how you define it...That which is far greater than ourselves and 'moves in mysterious ways'..Yes. Whether of supreme being or natural phenomena which we can not yet comprehend.Either way it can be utterly amazing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To me, they are totally irrational. THey think I am. So who cares? I don't bug them or try to convert them, so they should simply bug off.

Beinhart, Dawson, and all of you, just shut up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Atheism is a progressive science, and as a science it is poorly served when a writer like Beinhart feels it adequate to simply give his personal opinions on the subject.
The non-existence of one or many deities has been conclusively demonstrated by JL Mackie in his "Miracle of Theism." Morality's pre-existence to religous thought has been described by many anthropologists and sociologists. A good summary can be found in Michael Shermer's "The Science of Good and Evil."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those rationalists who want logic and reason to rule their lives use probably one sixth of their brain. The imagination, as most artists understand, requires the whole brain and is the place where real thought and CHANGE takes place. For example, you imagine doing something, then you do it.

This is the place where God resides, and each culture has its referents that guide the change. For Christians, it the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament and Christian culture that has existed for over 2000 years. For Buddhists, it's 8000 years of teaching monks how to reach Nirvana.

Just as Buddha teaches the path to perfection, so can Christianity, though there's many different perceptions of that path and end.

More specifically, God is a Utopian vision of a better world, however one defines it. Once one envisions that world, he/she begins the difficult work of achieving it. As most know, Utopian visionaries can be highly motivated people, kill others in the name of God, or lead a nation in a fight for civil rights, equality for blacks, women, GLBT's, etc.

That is the only rational explanation I can give for God. And, that is why I believe in LOve, Compassion, Justice and Hope for a better tomorrow.

Peace

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just read the Bile, its all in there!

RT
Privacy Center

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's naive to think that "God is good" means he's a nice chap who never let's anything unpleasant happen to us. It's also naive to apply Greek logic to anything but computers and railway timetables. The Greek world view was quite wrong, except for Heraclitus. Ask the next particle physicist you meet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why do people CLUTCH a belief in God? Wow, read that title and you KNOW a thoughtful, unbiased article is about to follow.

Of course, atheists clutch nothing. Mental purity is the goal, apparently.

Once this nation is cleaned up to some of your specifications, it's not going to resemble America, with its messiness, diversity, and democracy anymore. I hate to mention what past nations it just MIGHT resemble.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our ancesters were tribal people, which was required for hunting and other food gathering jobs. Many of us still use these social organisations because they are a practical way of networking in our current society, and they have definate social and political benefits. To say that all members of religious organisations are really believers is I think a big stretch.
When religion or any other social group starts pushing untested or "strange" beliefs or activities that interfere with the rest of us it is time to leave that group.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Today's NYT op-ed by Bob Herbert is worth reading. (Sorry, don't have the link.) He talks of the documentary, "Pray the Devil Back to Hell," the story of a group of Liberian women who got together to pray for peace in amid the horrible conditions in that country. "It was a crazy dream," one of the women said. But they did it, but they also spawned a movement of not just praying but of action. I don't know about God, who or what it is, but I believe that people with faith in something beyond themselves have made positive changes in their lives and in the world. Maybe that's all God is, just the inspiration that causes people of good will to do what needs to be done.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here in the red-state South, fundamentalist Christianity is as often a cover for superstitious generat ional Satanism as it is a real faith. Bear with me--I was born into one of those families.

The louder the Bible-quoting, the more likely that the quoter is up to theft, forgery, or other confidence games. The public perception of "He's a Christian and a good man" is utilized to conceal the covert and covetous activities of many a minor-league Bernie Madoff. These scammers will be the exact folks who espouse special creation and modern dinosaurs.

Second group will be the incestuous. Lot's daughters and the lack of prohibition on incest in the Bible makes that book a natural ass-covering device for these guys.

To define whether you are dealing with a faith-hope-charity nonjudgmental Christian or a generational scam-meister, start on the book of Revelations. The folks who follow the Beast will have the last word on the prophecies and give you the word that only their bunch will survive the Last Days, which they will schedule for day after tomorrow at the latest.

Do keep your hands on your wallet pocket and hide the house deed while verifying, please.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I tend to agree with snailkite and appreciate the brevity. Mr. Bienhart's writing has been popping up like crabgrass on Web sites everywhere for months, and I, for one, have grown weary of his "opinions". He prattles on and on about a subject which is tired, over-worn and increasingly irrelevant in a scientific world. The early Greeks seemed to " think" their way through life quite nicely (and effectively) without blaming or giving credit to "god", and we would do well to pick up on their inspirations. Requiring a "god" (or denying one in order to change the subject)takes away any credit for man being able to think up such concepts as right and wrong on his own, and neatly lays all the blame for malfeasance on someone else, so that we might be not held responsible for our reticence and lack of willingness to think for ourselves. I wish Mr. Beinhart would "opine away" somewhere out of range where I am not forced to hear him so often.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...which you are quite good at. Theology is another can of fish entirely.

But since you cared to opine on the matter, this "athiests vs. believers" argument reminds me of the "You're either with us or you're with the terrorists" statement of our beloved former president. No, Mr. Bush, I do not have to choose between neocons and Al Qaeda. Nor do I have to choose between fundamentalist atheistic rationalism and fundamentalist religion.

I find it inexplicably profound, the fact that I am conscious of my own existence, and the incredible, blazing, infinite detail of the Universe perceived by the senses, which, I intuit, is only a tiny sliver of Reality. Who cares about God or not God? God is a concept which means something different for each mind it appears in.
Obviously, the idea of a big cranky judge sitting in the sky is absurd; but there are more spiritually mature beings who relate to the divine just as clearly as most people relate to their personality, bank account, and sex drive, for whom fear and worldly concern no longer have a hold. Can you truly say it's all based on a delusion? Who are you to say that? Have you understood yourself so thoroughly, freed yourself so fully of self-delusion, that you can judge where the entire human race is at?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I do believe in God - it's a simple matter of faith. I do not believe in organized religion - it always seems to get twisted.

Ghandi once said something along the lines of "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians do not seem to be very much like your Christ."

That is the whole problem with the world of Christianity and how the rest of the world sees it. Mankind has always used God for his own means. Look at Ireland. Look at the Spanish Inquisition. Look at the Muslim fanatics who kill people of other religions and even people of a different Muslim faith in the name of their own sick view of their religion. Look at the Bush administration. Both Mohammed and Jesus are surely horrified to be so used.

Every self-rightous Christian is actually a worker for the other side. Funny how they wear their religion on their sleeves. As a matter of fact, whenever I hear a person proclaiming their Chrtistianity often and loud, I know to steer clear of that person - it is only a matter of time before they try to screw you over.

Don't blame God because there are evil men who use Him. It's called free will.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When Theologists can prove there is or was a God then we can all truly believe. I prefer my Agnostic approach of percieving a supreme being and not all the hand me down tales of man and his overactive imagination. Why is it that we constantly have revised versions of the Bible and the Catholic church at present is dreaming up and designating new sins - does anybody know?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I would recommend to the author of the piece and anyone else who takes a firm position that the only conclusion without material proof in the existence of God is that there is no God, to read what philosophers like Kierkegaard have said regarding this dilemma. Even aside from the concept of God, if a self described atheist denies or refutes anything outside of material proof, they are denying themselves the ability to experience life beyond comprehension. It is an absolute pessimism towards Nature and how we experience that nature, to believe it can only exist within the confines of our finite logic. We have defined something which is beyond our comprehension - infinity, but we don't refute the concept of infinity simply because we can never quantify it. That is the same basic idea with those who believe in the concept of God - a definition of the unquantifiable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The problem with "God" is that the word has no meaning. See detailed discussion in the chapter "Does the word God exist" in the book
Our Almost Impossible Universe:
Why the laws of nature make the existence of humans extraordinarily unlikely

Electrons are neither particles nor waves. Those are classical concepts which do not apply. For what objects are see book.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Resist your temptation to lie
By speaking of separation from God,
Otherwise,
We might have to medicate
You.
In the ocean
A lot goes on beneath your eyes.
Listen,
They have clinics there too
For the insane
Who persist in saying things like:
"I am independent from the
Sea,
God is not always around
Gently
Pressing against
My body."

Written by Hafiz, 13th century Sufi poet
From 'The Gift'
Translated by Daniel Ladinsky

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It starts in the heartland, in Sandusky, Ohio and in small-minded cattle towns, but also in the cement hallways of engineering buildings. Kids grow up listening to their parents sing all sorts of dogmatic schisms in the church hymns. Not once do they catch any sight of God walking around. Science works. We become researchers struggling for grants, or we become salespeople because it pays and we’re good, or we work landscaping businesses.

Then it happens. You come to realize that there are a few real-life comic book-style freaks with weirdo powers walking among us. Sometimes they look into and through us just like they were looking through a bottle of milk. Our innermost secrets, our sadnesses, all are visible. There are apparently blue and gold layers in the air around our heads and bodies, and emotional lightning bolts can come out of us. Some of the freaks love to make terminal soft tissue carcinomas shrink and disappear. Oh, and as for the invisibles in the room here with us, the freaks can see their feathers. Most of these people are completely ashamed of their abilities, almost like they were gay teenagers in some Evangelical church. So they shut up and hide. I know that one works as a male nurse at a psych hospital.

Then you yourself fool around because it’s fun, and it happens to you too. Now you feel dirty. A Sacred force is out there and for crazy reasons you become the Sacred force’s fool, its slave. And you work to strengthen your own gifts. And as the years go by you become the freak you feared, and more. And it’s so easy to shut up and keep quiet about the world that’s real to you.

I’ll give you an early example. A professor asked an audience what would a spaceman say about the way we’re treating the earth. Zip, I ran down the hall and had the answer posted in four workshop rooms in two minutes. Look, I just happened to have four carbon paper copies in my backpack that I typed up early that morning. The professor got tipped off too fast, caught me coming out of the last workshop room and we both busted out laughing. That was years ago.

And then from directly in the intellectual center of scientific thought you become some kind of a scientific revolutionary. Science still works just fine, all the time. Until it just doesn’t, because the world changes.

Yes, the lifelong freakout carries right through to political revolution. No bomb throwing. This is revolution from the heart of where you used to be originally, and you’ll obey all the country’s laws as usual, until (remember, you are a fool) a command says otherwise, and then the laws are just tough luck and the crooks that made the laws can eat them. Use the Force, Luke!

In the end these gifts are a means to an end. Revolution isn’t about your own gifts, it’s all about using them with others. Successfully working with others means shutting your mouth a lot and pretending that you’re normal.

Like I said, this is so absolutely bizarre. People walk around knowing you and they haven’t got a clue.

I have a healthy respect for the militant innocents who don’t believe in God. They have the courage of their convictions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What do people believe when they say they believe in God (and why)?

It makes no sense for the atheist or otherwise non-believer to ask "why do people believe in God?" This is a trap that makes them assume they know what they or other people are talking about when they say "God." If you listen to different kinds of "God-talk" you hear God serving a different function in each person's life, and to say they believe in Him means something different for many people.

Rather than relativistic dribble, this is a logical outcome of one's rejection of St. Anselm's "Ontological Proof" of the existence of God, which went something like: we have an idea of God, and that idea includes or is summed up as "perfection," and perfection necessarily exists. In other words, God has to exist, even before we can say what He is. To one who rejects this question-begging, any discussion of God is at first a discussion of what God means (beyond a necessarily existent whatever) for those concerned.

This materialist approach to God-talk is already pretty old though. Ludwig Feuerbach in the early to mid-19th century was already writing about how people project their desires and otherwise worldly beliefs into their God-talk. This realm of real human desire and real beliefs about the world is where the serious atheist begins their search for why people believe in God. Because this search belongs to the real-world and not the lala-land where everything fits neatly in a basket labeled "God said so" or "Reason," there are going to be almost as many different explanations for why people believe in God as their are believers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There was a fascinating article in the NYTimes a year or so ago describing an experiment looking at believers in all the major religions. Two groups were examined. One described themselves as very devout and the other as moderately devout. The DNA of the two groups was studied, and 83% of those describing themselves as very devout had a gene that only 17% of the other group possessed. Eric Hoffer wrote "The True Believer", a small book positing that true believers were very dangerous indeed. Another brilliant man, Joseph Campbell, wrote many books about the phenomenon of religious belief which supports the author of this article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Language came about as a system of appraisal for traders to arrive at a value for a given thing offered or action performed. As the bartering became more competitive and pervasive, the need for various linguistic superlatives grew. The concept of a god who could behold all the activities of man developed as the ultimate linguistic descriptor that attested to the quality of a given good or service.

All gods need some definition or regulation though, just like our commodities exchange. So religion stepped in with an army of penniless priests to further articulate and intensify man's activity - in the name of god.

So in recent memory Newt "Fear Itself" Gengrich rallied his party in Congress to BELIEVE in various legislative solutions to the country's woes. Phil Gramm used similar language to "modernize" the commodities exchange; this led to the contrived spike in oil prices last year and corrupted the idea of the "supply and demand" god.

So our idea of god is bound up in the ideas expressed in language. God is a trick of the language, a necessary trick to imply meaning to our most basic observations, physical and literal alike.

I know, "snake oil" says it all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

why doesn't the author simply admit that the "evidence" is that We Don't Know, may Never Know, and that it may not be our purpose to know if "god" exists. That the Judeo/Christian god-Jesus Christ model is at odds with science and reason seems obvious to anyone not with an emotional need for a father figure(or momma figure if you're into Mary "mother" of God). But there may or may not be a Force or causation of the Universe or for existence or for whatever we don't know yet. At this stage, our scientists haven't scratched the surface. That's OK. Lots of important things for them to do in the meantime.

PS

When the US writes its next constitution, which will be sooner than anyone thinks, aside from getting rid of the obsolete states and their boundaries, can we strip churches and synagogues(and mosques, scientologists, etc.) of tax exempt status. No wonder our national debt was awful even before Obama and BushII.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They'll even worship corporate rapists destroying our environment and poisoning us all like crazy. Despite the worst of the economic times, ID couldn't even make it to 40% for Obama. Even MT was a hell of a lot saner and came closer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I find it very scary to read the comments from so many Alternet readers, who are (hopefully) a step above the norm in intelligence, and yet superstitiously continue to abandon all logic when it comes to belief in God.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've read through all the 120 or so comments that have been posted so far, and I'm surprised that there are almost no conspiracy theory postings. I should add one of those, just to spice things up with a bit of variety, even though it's not really the way I usually look at religion. Okay, here goes: For millennia, religion has been a conscious conspiracy on the part of the plutocracy, to sap the will of the people and make them less likely to rebel against the plutocracy. People are promised pie in the sky if they'll just remain docile. Kings claim to be chosen by gods. I was surprised when Bush made that claim; I thought it had become obsolete by now. You can see some of this conspiracy theory in the Zeitgeist movie.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To analyze what other people believe about anything is pure folly. The God thing has been around forever and shows no signs of going away. In practical terms, it's none of anyone's business what other people believe or don't believe. I don't want either side of the argument shoved in my face, thank you. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If I may rip off Todd Rungren.

For me, God is that which created the Universe or caused it to be. God's nature is a mystery. And I sense that God is immanent throughout the Universe. But it seems that after creating the Universe, that futzing around with details like human morals fall well below any threshold that God needs to deal with.

Any attempts to humanize God come off like a comic book. And praying to God to change things after declaring that God is all powerful and perfect and has a plan is the silliest of human activities.

But it also irritates me to observe atheists using the Christian definition of God to prove that God does not exist because its form is not that of the Christian trinitarian God. It only negates the Christian view, not God's existance.

It also irritates me to hear Christians accusing Moslems of believing a different God. If two religions agree that there is one God, but disagree on the details of God's existance, then it's pretty obvious that we have a case similar to the 6 blind men and the elephant.

I think that Lao Tsu got it right. "The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

By William Blake

(a)

The Argument. Man has no notion of moral fitness but from Education. Naturally he is only a natural organ subject to Sense.

I. Man cannot naturally perceive but through his natural or bodily organs.

II. Man by his reasoning power can only compare & judge of what he has already perceiv'd.

III. From a perception of only 3 senses or 3 elements none could deduce a fourth or fifth.

IV. None could have other than natural or organic thoughts if he had none but organic perceptions.

V. Man's desires are limited by his perceptions; none can desire what he has not perceiv'd.

VI. The desires & perceptions of man, untaught by anything but organs of sense, must be limited to objects of sense.

(b)

I. Man's perceptions are not bound by organs of perception; he perceives more than sense (tho' ever so acute) can discover.

II. Reason, or the ratio of all we have already known, is not the same that it shall be when we know more.

III. [This proposition is missing.]

IV. The bounded is loathed by its possessor. the same dull round, even of the universe, would soon become a mill with complicated wheels.

V. If the many become the same as the few when possess'd, More! More! is the cry of a mistaken soul; less than All cannot satisfy Man.

VI. If any could desire what he is incapable of possessing, despair must be his eternal lot.

VII. The desire of Man being infinite, the possession is Infinite & himself Infinite.

Conclusion.

If it were not for the Poetic or Prophetic Character the Philosophic & Experimental would soon be at the ratio of all things, and stand still, unable to do other than repeat the same dull round over again.

Application.

He who sees the Infinite in all things sees God. He who sees the Ratio only sees himself only.

Therefore God becomes as we are, that we may be as he is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The deleterious affect religion has in my opinion is that it makes a person more likely to have faith in others including their authority figures.

I think the religious tend to be more likely to trust and believe the President for example than atheists are.

I am not aware of any studies on this aspect of atheism and religion. I would be curious to see the results of the Milgram experiments using an atheist group versus a religious group. I would not be surprised if atheists are less trusting of authority figures and therefore less likely to be duped by them when they tell lies such as President George W did on Iraq's WMD.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The universe existed long before we got here and will continue long after we're gone. By my definition, either the universe itself is God or is a manifestation of an energy that continues to create and sustain the universe. There is no way of knowing, but humanity is just a drop in the bucket of time. By my definition, if the existence of the universe can't be denied, the existence of God can't be denied - God is all around us and in us.

One problem presented in this article is that it does not define "God." Which God does the author not believe in? People are defined as much by what they don't believe as they are by what they do believe. There is a significant philosophical difference, for example, between a Christian atheist and a Jewish atheist, as individuals are infused by the cultures from which they emerge. Buddhists don't particularly believe in God, but Buddhism is still considered a "religion."

Arguments about the existence or non-existence or validity or idiocy of belief in God seem to me to be entirely beside the point.

The bigger problem is what to do now that we're here, born into a world we didn't create. The best features of world religions may be found in the way they attempt to answer this important question. How should we treat each other or the planet? My religion offers metaphorical explanations for navigating life. To call it anything other than metaphor for the Unknowable is, to my mind, idolatry. We can't know what it all means - we can only decide how to respond.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I was once a believer. Then I left my church. Later I became born again. After years of questioning I decide I was agnostic. As the years go by I have become more rational. Now I'm almost a 100% non believer in any chance of a god.
I believe man created all gods because he could not believe in his fellow man.
As far as religions go, i believe they are the root of all evil.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Many people continue to clutch to their belief in God, even though there's no evidence of a higher power. Why?







I'll admit this much, our "collective religions" leave much to be desired with their "formula approach" to Life and at times simplistic solutions to complex issues.

We know that the corrosive effect of scientific rationalism has been the nemesis of religion.
We know that until the 90's or so to say, speak or discuss something spiritual..you were considered a "bit off..kooky...not quite right!!!"
Carl Jung understood that if we deviated too far from our instincts that it would result in mental illness to the individual, mass psychosis and war for society at large. He understood and was met with great opposition that one of those "instincts" was a "spiritual impulse or spiritual drive" of the psyche/soul of man..that this was as "natural" as having a "sexual drive"
This is where he and Freud disagreed and parted ways.
Jung understood also that these powerful tendencies operated outside the power and grasp of the human will and ego.
He understood that the names we had for God in the days past had changed, into words like "terrorism"..communism, materialism..drug and alcohol addiction, sexual deviance and excess.... but that these autonomous forces were still nonetheless powerful, compelling and at times destructive.
He understood that in humans there was always a basic need to experience certain emotions and feelings of awe and wonder, terror and fear...
Lastly he understood that we had made huge advances technologically but that we remained almost completely ignorant and unknown about our own "psychology" and that MAN now has become the number one threat to life on Earth.
When asked if he believed in God.....he quietly stood back in his chair..and said you see I have trouble with that question.....because by saying believing..your implying "having to believe"....but if you "Know"..you have the experience and the knowledge....there is no need to believe.......if you believe in God, you don't know God..then why should we bother discussing it. It is one thing to talk about war and another to experience it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'll be damned if I know!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm glad to see this exchange taking place, and thanks for letting me vent: The intrusion of religious dogma into "real life" is a big frustration for me. Defending the strength of one's faith is like boasting, "I am more superstitious than you are!" My concession to them is that if their faith in "god" is their only source of strength to help them through tough times, then go ahead and cling to it. But don't use it as a club to belittle my reliance on the supports I create for myself, or intimate that my lack of your faith renders me less moral, caring, or virtuous than you. Especially since 90% of those who profess that face certainly don't live their lives as if they will ever be judged by "god" or anyone else.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Faith as Superstition
Posted by: lturner1116 on Jan 31, 2009 10:14 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm glad to see this exchange taking place, and thanks for letting me vent: The intrusion of religious dogma into "real life" is a big frustration for me. Defending the strength of one's faith is like boasting, "I am more superstitious than you are!" My concession to them is that if their faith in "god" is their only source of strength to help them through tough times, then go ahead and cling to it. But don't use it as a club to belittle my reliance on the supports I create for myself, or intimate that my lack of your faith renders me less moral, caring, or virtuous than you. Especially since 90% of those who profess that face certainly don't live their lives as if they will ever be judged by "god" or anyone else.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Many people believe in God(s) because of Near Death Experiences some people have. It forever changes them in ways psychological experiences do not. Some people believe in God(s) because of the way prayer often helps sick people, even when the patient doesn't realize he/she is being prayed for. Then, there was the Yogi, Swami Rama, who in 1970, walked into an American research laboratory; under the most rigorous experimental conditions, he simulated death by virtually stopping his brain waves and heart beat, and yet remained fully conscious of events occuring around him in the laboratory.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I follow George Carlin’s logic, “If this is the best that God can do, I am not impressed.” I think when you take this along with other thought experiments like; If God is omnipotent, can he make a rock so heavy that even he can’t lift it and the Celestial Teapot argument you can deduce that God is pretty much a non sequitur. People are always looking for cause and effect because that’s the way our brains work based upon our perceptions of the physical reality of time, but what if there are realities where time is different? In the Quantum world certain particles, such as positrons, move backward through time so there may not be a need for a first cause where the universe is involved. If on the other side of the Big Bang there was a different reality, or physics, then a first cause is moot. In this alternate reality time may not have existed or may have manifested itself differently. The Many Worlds theory is one in which the physicist Ernst Schrödinger explored. Then there’s also the concept of the Multiverse. All I’m saying is that there are better explanations for our existence, other than God, based upon we now know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The sugar is sweet for the agnostic with no feer of sugar overdose. The difference between Atheists and agnostics is the Atheists say= go ahead ,Please attack me , it is good for my mental groath, unlike agnostics who are actually just lazy atheists. Agnostics are afraid they may have to expand their brains to actually come up with a rational conclusion on the subject. Agnostics are the type of people that don't vote because they see no difference between people and their issues.Being agnostic is not a position it is a method used to stay in the sugar zone. Sweet. But we are on to you. Agnostics function as people who act as if there are no gods, called Atheists, Well, Lazy atheists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Belief in God is a hierarchical thing: it started with gods, and before that spirits. "God" is an urban concept, like "King": if there is a heap, there must be someone sitting on top of it.

The real question is why humans started to think that the spirit was superior to matter, the mind superior to the body, and culture superior to nature. My guess is that, quite simply, it was recognized that muscle obeys thought.

Where we went really wrong, was when we added the concepts of good and evil, but that's another story.

As for morality, it has nothing to do with religion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

they have been told to !
That is all. Good patriots and other people do what they are told. Basta. No need to think for themselves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The knowledge of God is the fulfillment of the mind's striving to persevere in being.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here - Try leaving you computer and go outside and look up.

I assume it is still daylight in America?

What do you see?

Don't focus you eyes on God or you may go blind

Actually it seems you already are

But can't you feel the Sun's warmth?

Human beings have been completely aware of God for many thousands of Years

God is above us

Don't get confused by the Moon - that is for lunatics who believe American People have actually landed there and come back.

Sure you believe in that

Which just goes to show the nonsense that you believe in

God is a state of mind

God is Good

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our sense of something transcendent is embedded in light itself, of which everything in the universe is made. It is a remnant of the Sigularity, when our present universe was literally all the same thing. It is carried over in the part of light that we can't explain, which Heisenberg called the Uncertainty Principle, Plato called the shadow on the wall of the cave, why Taoists say, "The Tao that can be spoken is not the Tao," and why the Hebrews don't pronounce the name of G-d. Scientifically speaking, it is the Anomaly. All religions have different words and belief systems based on the experience of this, the same transcendent presence. See www.SolomonsProof.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Like the end of the movie, Contact, all we have is each other.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How does one define God is the central question here. Is it small and personal, ie immanent, or beyond any definition and transcendant? Or both? What makes humans think with their limited view that they are at the top of the evolutionary ladder? Do we know for certain that there is no life on Mars, for example? I think most people would say yes to that question. However, are we certain that we have the tools to discover what life there might be when we have instruments today here on earth that measure qualities and even concrete realities we could not measure even 10 years ago? To think about the prime mover or God in any context can expand the mind if we can let go of our hubris.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Larry, you do not have a grasp of what being agnostic means...in short, we neither believe nor disbelieve in a God due to our understanding that we CAN NOT know, that it is beyond human comprehension to either grasp the conception of a God, and to know that there is none - one cannot possibly know that something such as a God does not exist. It's pretty basic. You have a pretty good article here but you lose credibility when you canot understand something a simple as this.
Thank you,
Linda

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"God is a spirit...God is love...In Him we both move and breathe and have life." If God withdrew his presence, all living things would immediately die.

When Jesus was dying on the cross, he prayed and then heard a voice from heaven. Some standing by said that it thundered.

When Paul was knocked off his ass on the road to Damascus, he saw a heavenly vision of Jesus speaking with him. Others were intrigued that they heard a voice but saw nothing.

God reveals Himself to whomsoever it pleases Him to do so. He is all around us at all times, but when He speaks, only his intended audience hears His voice. When He appears, only His intended audience sees Him. So, those who hear and see God cannot prove his existence to those who neither hear nor see him.

And miracles are not convincing proof. When Moses led the Hebrews out of captivity in Egypt by many signs and wonders, thousands of Hebrews rebelled against Moses and God and therefore all died off while wandering in the wilderness.

The religious elite who decided to kill Jesus did so when they heard that he raised Lazarus from the dead.

Blind faith is for fools and madmen, but God reveals himself with incontrovertible proof only to those whom He chooses. I can tell you from personal experience that it isn't necessarily because someone is good. I know I'm not.

Some folks receive faith SHAZAM! like a thunderbolt. Some folks strive hard through much prayer and fasting. Many gain faith in many ways. (I speak of true faith in the true God, not tradition or culture.)

Your salvation is your responsibility, but this much I do know, and take it for what you will: No one who should be lost will be saved, and no one who should be saved will be lost. God weighs it all in the balance.

BTW Monotheism as the author defines it may have been invented around 1300 BC, but Adam and Eve (not the first humans) lived around 4,000 BC and worshipped the one and only God.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is a cure for religion. Thinking. It really works.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The only reason why adults believe in the "God" of organised religion is because they were, in effect, conditioned like Pavlov's dogs, to believe in such self-destructive nonsense as children. In other words, such adults are emotionally retarded.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When religion is allied with evidence, it becomes superstition. The thrust of this Beinhart piece then is, "Why doesn't my superstition work?"

My question is, "Why is it necessary to repeat again and again, as we have for the last 225 years, that 'existence' is not a predicate?"

Any sentence that applies the concept of existence as a predicate is simply redundant and therefore a kind of mumbling. "I exist" says nothing more than "I can use the word 'I.'"

If you expect more than that from the word "existence," I know where there's a pot of gold waiting for us, at the end of the rainbow.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I suppose my god is the universe itself of which I am a part of...that makes me...well god...the fact that I equate myself with god ought not to roil the waters, after all YOU are god too...but if I am god, and you are god, and it is god, and all is god....and there is nothing that is not god, then god loses the very meaning that requires it to be a distinct idea...and THEREIN lies the point...GOD IS AN IDEA...

...a mental construct within a mind, that WITHOUT a mind WOULD NOT EXIST AT ALL...We are not created by the gods...WE create the gods to according to our whims, our fashions, when we tire of them, we discard them like a pair of worn out socks...

...Yet I look up at the stars and wonder "What could be more supernatural than the universe itself...is IT not MIRACULOUS...Suppose there was no Creator...isn't IT a "miracle" -that the universe just spontaneously appeared? Apparently out of nothing? THAT defies logic as well as any GOD idea...

...and yet the universe IS here, THAT is undeniable...and we DO know that we are all extensions of the same stuff that stars are made of...WE ARE the stuff of stars and that is why we FEEL such a CONNECTION with everything...because WE ARE EVERYTHING, AND EVERYTHING IS US...and THAT is the secret of the universe and THAT is both knowable and understandable.

...We have the facts, there is no more need for speculation, WE ARE THE GODS AND THE GODS ARE EVERYTHING THAT WAS, IS, AND WILL EVER BE...AMEN.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And that's *thinking.* Try it. It doesn't hurt. Honest.

You want evidence of God? Look in the mirror!!!

And of a free will? Think, and exercise your will.

The article said something about when the body sends a message to the brain that the stomach is empty, one looks in the icebox. Not necessarily. One *might* *DECIDE* to look in the icebox. Or not. If I went to get something to eat every time I felt hungry, I'd have to increase the size of every door in the house.

But I don't. I *DECIDE* to do something else.

Where do you think that came from? Where do you think the ability to write that article came from?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The proof is the existence of consciousness. Further proof is the self-assembly of proteins for particular purposes. Some sort of intelligence must already exist in the particles making up proteins (or anything else) for that to be possible.

But it makes no difference whether anyone believes that or not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where in the universe is heaven? Where is hell? They are described as physical locations so they must exist somewhere, right?

Why didn’t God reveal information about our solar system that we didn’t know? For example, he could have told us what the moon was made of and how it was formed. Why have we had to answer important questions on our own?

Why do early pictures of Jesus have a sun with a cross (shorthand for the cross of the zodiac) behind his head? Why do images of many other deities (Horus, Attis, Krishna, Dionysus, Mithra) have a similar sun on or behind their head? How do all these deities share many of the same attributes as Jesus?
Birth Dec 25th
Born of a virgin
Star in the East
3 Kings
12 disciples
crucified
dead for 3 days
resurrected


If you could know if God truly existed or not, would you want to know?

To answer the above questions, google “Zeitgeist” and watch the first third of that movie. Then study astrology, astronomy, history, archaeology, sociology, geology, and physics to prove the movie right or wrong and then get back to me with your findings. While you do that, I’ll be thinking about these questions:

How is a viable planet seeded with life? Possible explanations are a combination of hydrothermal vents, supernovas releasing the proper elements, and an energy source (lightning). The combination has proven to form organic compounds.

Is there other life in the universe? There may be alien life as (relatively) close as Europa, a moon of Jupiter. Certainly with the trillions of planets in the universe, life is likely to exist elsewhere. (It doesn’t mention aliens in the bible, does it? Why would God forget to include information as important as that in His “good news”?)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The reasons given are within the boundaries of an ideology which protects a person against insights arising, that produce a different picture, though not entirely. The problem is defining how memories of terror are banned from consciousness. The beliefs in a god or a religion or morality or of a healer savior are deeply disguised strategies to extinguish or soothe terror forebodings of impending personal and social violation. The fact is that economic violation is to an adult what sexual violation is to a child. The hideous insecurity of billions of people faced with a stubborn vicious aristocracy manning the gates of the cattle chute makes for tenuous gambler beliefs to fend off insignificance, humiliation, slavery, and other depression factors,i.e. daily ocurrences that flood consciousness with anxiety which brings commoners to church, alcohol, and manipualation by relief hucksters.
Joking about belief in a god will not further the struggle for human liberation from an endless history of aristocratic predator induced misery. Fundamentalism is a sickness which is understood. The study of psychology has been knocked from its revolutionary foundation in order to rationalize and normalize every order of perversion created by the seething pressure cooked life in which there is no earthly, dignified satisfaction to be had by a common person, particulary women, children and old people.Impulse is forced into perverted outlets because normal behavior restages adults unconscious gruesome childhood abuse as people enter trances when presented with the parallel situation while rearing their own children.We do what was done to us. Normal mainstream cultural upbringing results in perversions of every kind, particularly the ones psychologists never mention. Social behaviors are all perverted in a top down run social maze. A liar for religion, whatever the religion, delivers a version of reality that places hell in an individuals mind, not in aristocratic social practices. Each religious prophet is a master liar inducing his own trance as he or she manages the trance fantasies of the believer. Above all, religion and belief bring about commoner "submission" to a lord, any lord, any lady,to anyone who cripples a broken person with his or her phony veneer of arrogant certainty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A certain percentage of us are gay, a certain percentage left or right-handed, a certain percentage blue or brown eyed. A certain percentage believers,and a certain percentage thinkers. I'm fairly certain these percentages have been stable for a long time, and not likely to change much in the future. These seem to be the immutable facts of life; the cards we've been dealt. These facts aren't a bad thing in and of themselves. It's when we allow that certain percent of us who are dummies to have an undue influence over the rest of us, that we begin having problems.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What is all this about the God in the Bible being good? Didn't he murder every man woman and child on earth except for Noah and family because they weren’t behaving the way he wanted them to? Doesn’t that make him a terrorist? The bible god would make Osama proud. I personally think the bible portrays God with all the weakness found in human nature. God is much greater than that. There is no earthly religion that can portray God because God and nature are one and the same. The comprehension of Gods law is the comprehension of natural law, Any of the revealed religions are nothing but interpretations of man made laws. They are all faulty and not worthy of God.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But atheists don't have beliefs. They themselves always say so. They're not part of a religion, don't have beliefs, and can't be called fundamentalists. They say so, themselves.

But when I read so many comments showing so much contempt for difference, and an implication that everyone should be the same, I wonder what our world would be with people like these in charge. The highest number I can come up with googling what percentage of Americans are atheist is 4%. This is too small a percentage to ever rule the rest of us, and that's a very good thing, I imagine. No tolerance, no compassion, not even any curiosity. How about this writer sitting down with 3 believers and asking about their life paths and why they believe as they do, instead of telling us all how he's so certain he already knows it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why is believing in YOUR version of god, and it is YOUR version, or your religion's, any different than believing in the Easer Bunny, Tooth Fairy, Man on the Moon, Loch Ness Monster, etc? 90% of believers, believe in a god who is a Pez dispenser, or personal Santa as was previously stated. 10%, who are more thoughtful believe in an unexplainable being, but they feel it, and we have to agree. This being made this happen in their lives, or that happen. Perhaps it would have happened anyway, but if you believe in this guiding force, you will attribute things to it.

This article is interesting as it takes the natural disposition of humans, to make sense of your world, as a very good explaination for god belief. We tend to attribute things to something specific even when there is no direct or explainable connection.

The reason that Atheists are speaking up more, is that the world might be a better place if they made social decisions based on reality, as opposed to letting some amorphous idea guide our decisions. The believers in spirits, ghosts, gods etc have had 6000 years, lets try a more rational/scientific approach.

Why do Grammy winners always thank god for making it happen, but you never hear Grammy losers, or losing sports teams say that god obviously likes the winner more than them?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I find it imminently fascinating that most persons, whether they believe in God or not, nonetheless correctly intuit that Jesus was a cool dude. A recent skit protesting Proposition 8 in California, for instance, had Jack Black portraying Jesus. The movie and play, "Jesus Christ, Superstar" brought him down to the pedestrian level with great music. A common saying these days is "having a come-to-Jesus moment." The Doobie Brothers sang "Jesus Is Just Alright." Leonard Cohen, a Jewish Canadian poet par exellence, wrote a terrific song, "Suzanne," that includes a stanza about Jesus. Norman Greenbaum wrote "Spirit in the Sky." And so it goes. Everybody, it seems, knows that Jesus is the quintessential good guy.

The first miracle that Jesus performed was in the little town of Cana. He was attending a wedding party when the wine ran out (Jews know how to party hardy--sometimes they went on for a week or two). Jesus turned about 90 gallons of water into wine that was so splendid that the honored guest thought that the best had been saved for the last, which is backwards. We have the same custom today that they had back then--we serve the Chateau Lafite Rothschild first, and then Boone's Farm when every one is toasted. Now, who wouldn't want a guy like Jesus at a party?

Jesus is the perfect way to judge whether or not anyone is a Christian. If one does not conduct oneself like Jesus, one is not a Christian. [Read about him for yourself.]

Jesus never killed anyone, neither did he advocate killing anyone, nor did he sanction killing anyone. He possesses the power to annihilate mankind, but he laid down his life rather than kill ("Yet will I show you a more excellent way.") and he commanded his disciples to follow his example, which they did then, have done since, and do even now. "They loved not their lives unto death."

This would be a far different world indeed if everyone were willing to lay down their life rather than kill.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Our number one drive is to understand what the world means in relationship to ourselves. This comes ahead of our need for food, safety, sex, or anything else."

The author begins with a false premise, which I copied above from the text. He asserts this but provides no proof. Understanding the world and our relationship to it comes AFTER we have sufficient food, safety, shelter, etc. to have the leisure time to think about it. Since he starts with a false premise, the whole chain of logic is invalid. Apparently, he has never heard of Maslowe's Hierarchy of Needs.

And yes, I'm an atheist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

From Bill Moyers' speech for Religion in American Life in 2000:

I believe that within the religious quest--in that deeper realm of spirituality which may well be the primal origin of all religion--lies what Gregg Easterbrook calls "an essential aspect of the human prospect." Here we are confronted with questions of life and purpose, of meaning and loss, of yearning and hope. We seek the answers to those questions first in our own tradition. T. S. Eliot wrote that "no man has ever climbed to the higher stages of the spiritual life who has not been a believer in a particular religion, or at least a particular philosophy." As I have dug deeper into my own roots, I have come to see that all the great religions grapple with things that matter, although each may come out at a different place, that each arises from within and expresses a lived human experience; and that each and every one of them deserves attention for the unique insight they offer into the human prospect. From Buddhists I have learned about the delight of contemplation and "the infinite within." Sufi Muslims have opened me to a deeper understanding of worship and prayer. The ancient prophets of Judaism will not allow me to forget the imperative of justice; from Hindus I have learned about "realms of gold hidden in the depth of our hearts"; from Confucianists about the empathy necessary to sustain the fragile web of civilization. Nothing I take from these traditions has come at the expense of my own story. Faith is not acquired in the same way you choose a meal in a cafeteria, but there is something liberating about This discovery leads us away from an ineffectual and condescending toleration of other faiths to an anticipation and engagement with them and to the understanding so beautifully expressed by Kathleen Norris when she writes: "We are all God's chosen now." In the next breath she prays, "God help us because we are."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I swore i would never do this on alternet,but, here it goes. There are two aspects to "God" , the personal and impersonal. The impersonal is the problem child because it is searched for by the mind. The mind is designed to deal with relativity and not the absolute. Therefore the search will ALWAYS end in belief at best. It is like having a computer that is missing a critical piece of information that is necessary to move one out of the field of belief and onto the direct experience of God.However, when the mind is brought to a completely restful condition,and remains undirected or followed, the possibility of consciousness that is awake to itself can be realized. This consciousness knows itself by itself without the need of an observer or object of perception. To the mind this is absurd and conjures up all sorts of beliefs,including religion. The personal "God", is a creation by the impersonal God and appears in any form that the mind is designed to perceive, including but not limited to humans. In other words any "thing" that appears as relativity inside the absolute field can be considered god. In religious terms this would be tantamount to blasphemy. The ONE GOD concept that religions lay claim to is the impersonal god interpreted or co opted by the mind. It must be this way because it is the best that the mind is capable of doing when dealing with concepts that are out of it's programing. The direct experience or realization of the impersonal god cannot be proved or disproved by thinking, logic ,reading "old" books etc. However, it can be exposed and realized as what and who we are regardless of what we believe or deny. Even in spiritual teachings that "teach enlightenment" or god realization, the same dilemmas arise because of the belief that the individual "gets enlightened'. the individual does not get enlightened, what's enlightened is already enlightened ie; consciousness awake to itself or The impersonal god. So keep believing or disbelieving on god, both acceptance and rejection of the subject end up in the same place, HERE. Here in the fullness of the realization of what we are as absolute compassion and peaceful unconditional love or here as that but choosing the illusion of separation from that. Any relative denial cannot escape from it's own essential nature no matter how clever or logical we think we are. One short moment where we become unidentified with our personality and realize our essence is enough to crush the most devout sceptic and transform him or her into that which was previously despised. The searcher or believer is searching for itself

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

poll in the last few weeks announced changes in religious views over the last ten years. I would suggest that the Bush 8 years were therein contained.

All catagories tested dropped. To me the most telling was the belief in God. This dropped from 90% to 80%. One might consider whether the George Bush move to a "faith based" politics or alternately to a semi-theocracy had an effect on the body politic. I am suggesting that the drop in belief in God was as a result of the revulsion to Bush politics. I would suggest that the ten percent were hypocrites all along. Bush made them decide to tell the truth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

God is a concept invented by human beings who lived in a world devoid of explanation. Today, we can see that there are many logical and proven reasons why those once 'mysterious' things occur. It's just that simple.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If you actually make friends with people who sincerely say they believe in God, you'll find that they don't all just use him as an excuse for everything. And, you will also find that "God" means a zillion different things depending on who you talk to. You can't just work off of one arbitrary definition of what this "God" word means, to say why people believe in it!

and furthermore, the entire essence of the word "faith" should have nothing to do with reason or evidence--otherwise, it is not faith anymore. If somebody's belief in God transcends reason and evidence to the point that nothing threatens their faith-light, including science or gazing at the stars, then not only is it true faith, but it is something to be admired in a time period where the value of everything is determined by its veritability or usefulness.

There are some cruel people out there, but it's not fair to lump them in with people that believe in something and yet are strikingly well-informed, and even *gasp* modern thinking.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All motherless children crave to be loved.

So, Organized Religion fills that emotional void for them - in so far as one can imagine a substitute loving mother.

Desperate people resort to desperate measures.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

just a slob like one of us?
if god had a name, would you want to know it, if knowing meant you had to believe in jesus and the saints and all the apostles...?

yeah, just yankin' yer chain a little. all this headbanging religious discussion has given me a headache!

(and it's joan osbourne)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why was this piece of crap, even published. Poorly written and did not make any sense for believers or atheists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Answering questions on your last paragraph...
1.) "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Genesis 1:1) It will not work without God because He is the creator and the maker. Our morality comes from HIM.
2.)"What man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one know the things of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God." (1Cor 2:11-12)
3.)"If anyone among you thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this one's religion is useless. Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world." (James 1:26-27)
4.) We would have nothing to value if God didn't exist because we would not exist.
5.)There are atheists because they have been lied to that there is no god or heaven and a hell.
6.)People do not want to hear the name of Jesus because is a powerful name that brings peace, healing, eternal salvation, life, deliverance, and joy. There str false religions that gain more "social acceptance" because there is no power or truth so it is easily accepted.
7.)"You shall have no other Gods before me."(Genesis 20:3)
8.) "And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him."(Hebrews11:6) Belief in Jesus will always be a battle for people because you have to have childlike faith.
9.)"Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword."(Mathew 10:34)The sword is the bible. God gave us His word as a sword to cut down lies. Christians will always be persecuted but it is the fight for saving souls or having a saved soul. People in other countries who do not have freedom of religion die for believing in Jesus because of hatred of His name.


Last note: "For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved."(John 3:17)
7.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is arguable that the biggest monotheistic religions have proven, for more than two millenniums, that they are much better promoting hate than love; they are much better at killing people than saving them. The reason monotheistic religions (e.g. Judaism, Islamism and Christianity), are constantly associated with war and terrorism, is because it’s part of their nature. They are fear based behaviors of a species that is capable of foreseeing its own extinction, but unable to come to terms with this ultimate reality.

Humans created these religions, not as tools to understand life or to investigate the world we live, but to annihilate questioning through faith and promote obedience. Questioning is a fundamental human trait that aids in the process of examining life, understanding life, and overcoming what religious people call evil, but we know as simply ignorance.

The gods humans created are filled with character traits we struggle to overcome: possessiveness and jealousy, having preferences, and being prone to revenge and violence.

The sacred books are full of these examples. They do emphasize more hate and separation among humans (and between human beings and the rest of the planet), than love and unity between all beings touched by this energy we call life.

You don’t have to be familiar with the sacred books to realize this; just read history or listen to the news. It shows more people hating and killing each other in the name of god, than any other ideology.

You might say: “that’s just politics, greed, love of money and power”. Funny thing though, is that the people who are alienated from politics, that don’t have money and can’t get to power, are the most religious communities; and the most crime infested ones.

I repeat, it’s arguable that believing in a god that says he is the only one is intrinsically violent; no matter what mythology you choose. When you try to eliminate diversity, you necessarily produce violence and war.

If you want to promote peace and live a non-violent lifestyle here is an advice: don’t believe in anything exclusively. Examine your life and the world around you, don’t exclude anything; question, experiment and practice. If then you find something beneficial, share it. Outside of that, you are in a blood filled fantasyland.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Religion is the cause of all evil".

Am I to believe a place full of atheists is some kind of crime-free utopia? Get real! Study some f'in history once in a while to see what atheists have done in the past. Ever hear of Stalin?! Not saying Christian fundies are better. I'm saying atheist fundies are WORSE!

Atheist fundies are worse than Christians who say that every bad thing in the world is because of Satan! First they claim to love logic so much, then they make the baseless ridiculous claim that 100% of bad everything is because of those "logicless" God-believers. LOL... way to turn everyone off from atheism.

Nobody is impressed that you still have moral values or ethics. Having moral values to make yourself as happy as possible isn't impressive. Stop trying so hard to impress yourself or others because the self-righteous attitude is not helping a bit.

They have a holier-than-thou attitude as if their specific logic is the one and only way to the supreme finding of all truth, when like everyone else they hardly know a damned thing about the universe. Are we close to a theory describing everything completely in physics? Not even close! And even if we were it would only explain the "what", "where", and "how" yet leave out the much more important "why" and possibly even "WHO".

Atheist fundies no doubt hold atheism back about five or six steps ahead of where it would otherwise be. I'm not an atheist but I if I were one I'd at least be a sensible one not a fundie maniac atheist hell-bent on some laughable jihad against religion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Do you believe in God?"

The more important question may well be: "Does God believe in you?"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If one reads what the ancient religions say it is much the same. "God"/"the Gods" came down from the sky (hence the wings on angels) and created mankind. and then He/They left. Left us all alone. Religion tries to rationalize an answer.
If you look at all the unexplained sightings around the globe and throughout time perhaps we are not alone. At least if "string-theory" is correct-multi-dimensionality. Personally I think this is just one big "rabbit-cage" and we are under observation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Despite the range of religions, it could be argued that are only two types of believers: those that believe god created man; and those that believe man created god(s).

An interesting consideration in this discussion comes from anthropology, which basically states that for a religion to be meaningful to a given culture it must reflect the economic structure of that culture. For example, if you live in an animistic religious culture, you will worship (revere) the animals that provide sustenance. In contrast, if you live in a highly differentiated culture, with a monetary system which disguises not only the value of labor, but also the dominate capital holders who control it, then it follows that the religious figure will also be invisible and difficult to define.

In order to understand the dynamics of religious-based conflicts, it's necessary to look at the economic elements underlying the religious justification. It's never actually about the religion; rather religion simply creates a bridge between the 'moral' justification and the economic imperative. Ethics (moral justification) are based on the intra-group alturistic survival mechanism, which needs to be mitigated, or even turned off, in order to commit violence against enemies--those who threaten the group's resource base.

Good discussion. However, I doubt that religious dogma will cease until the economy completely changes...or hell freezes over.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All you need to know is this.

Praying = being positive
God = Universe
Devil = Evil
Commandments = anything that strikes you as wrong, and there are many more then 10.

You do not have to be religious to be good. You do not have to believe in Santa to get presents on Christmas Day.

I believe there is no such thing as god. I don't care what anyone else thinks, but right now we are the most immoral society to live on this planet.

War, slave labor Walmart goods, liars, crooks and thieves. If you are some religious person, you need to look at every aspect of your life, because I guarantee you are no different then anyone else...and this is no excuse to just go to confession and be cleansed.

Religion is just the praising of hypocrisy. The forgiveness of sins, the rationalization of evil deeds, an immoral excuse to be evil...whether on purpose or by accident. There is no excuse.

Look at yourself and what you do from day to day. What you think, who you put down, what you feel, how you feel, and why you feel this way.

If Religion would just educate it's parish instead of teaching an Astrology Book, then I would be more for religion, but as far as I see it...it's just a cannibalistic cult acting as though they are immune to guilt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those that are enamored with their beliefs about God will never discover the truth about God.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The author needs to read or see "The Incorrigible Berlinski". A study on what Darwin theorized in the 19th century does not hold up under scientific scrutiny. Yes,I am a Christian, but Dr.Berlinski is not.
I'd also like to respond to the "sugar candy" comment regarding the Christian faith. It doesn't quite work that way, unless that comment describes the overwhelming thankfulness one feels when God answers prayer.
I'd also like to comment about the large number of Christians posting comments. I get my national news predominantly from Alternet. Even the New York Times is not liberal enough for me. Are the Christians posting comments as liberal is myself?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This has to be the most boring and poorly formatted article I've ever read on Alternet. This will be my final post on this one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

After the gig had been over for an hour, my wife and I decided that we didn't want to go to any parties and we didn't want anyone coming back to our house. We were tired and wanted to go to bed.

But whilst walking back from the pub we found this car with the engine on and someone inside asleep.

It is incredibly bitterley cold and I know how quickly cold can kill.

So we knocked on the car and woke him up.

My wife said - would you like a hot cup of coffee? - We only live just round the corner.

He said Yes Please.

I said - well come on then.

And so we invited him into our home and gave him a hot cup of coffee and he told us his emotional tale - but he seemed perfectly O.K. and we wanted to go to bed.

So I said - well we are chucking you out in 5 mins when you have finished your cup of coffee - but come down the pub next week - there's a great band on - and we'll probably have a party afterwards.

And now after 4 hours sleep I am slightly worried about him.

Maybe he didn't really tell us the truth. He seemed a nice person and was absolutely no threat. Maybe I should have said he could stay the night.

Now I awake, my daughter is back with a gaggle of giggling teenage girls, and I realise how lucky I am.

Maybe we have God within us - except God wouldn't have chucked him back into the night and told him to carry on his way - We are going to bed. Goodnight

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

does not in any way prove that you are right.

Those who choose to ignore or not to explore the positive evidence do so, perhaps, to maintain their own delusions of the cosmos being within the capacity of the human mind to explain. God by definition is outside the capacity of the human mind to comprehend, and this is a frightful thing for many, including atheists, agnostics and believers.

Fear of the enormity of the European (homosexuals, the infirm, the fragile, the diseased, the Gypsies, the Slavs, resistant Catholics, then finally the Jews) Holocaust caused many in power in the west to deny that it was taking place. To protect oneself from these frightful things, we say they do not exist.

When you explain how the bodies of Saints remain "incorruptible" decades after death with no embalming or protective measures taken ... I will consider your proof that there is no God.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An excellent article, and some even better comments from other readers.

We all have brains in our heads, and throughout our lives, we will see, hear and read things that may or may not be true. Generally speaking, we use our brains to decide what we will either accept as fact, or what we will discard as phony, usually after we have received new information, or by considering what we already know.

Belief though, seems to fall outside of these categories. Belief normally resides in the feeling or emotional part of our brain.

Our thinking, or analytical, brain is supposed to temper the feeling part.

It seems to me that people who 'believe' decide that they are not, after all, going to use the analytical or thinking parts of their brains. Either they can't be bothered, or else they will simply ignore the facts that contradict their faith.

Belief in God is the same thing as belief in mother's love. We take it as a given that mother automatically must love us, how could she fail to, she is our mother.

Honour thy father and thy mother. This command is as forceful as 'thou shalt believe in God'

My father is as passionately anti-religious as the pope is for it all. An all-loving, all-powerful God cannot exist in a world populated by defective human beings who spend most of their time finding better ways to kill each other.

So we have to have a devil to justify all the nastiness.

Presumably, if people were nice to each other, we could quite happily believe in God, because there would be nothing to make us think otherwise.

Religion seeks to mollify lust. Believe in God, fear him (why for Christ sake), and don't masturbate, or you will go blind.

One billion years ago, a primitive single celled entity or whatever appeared in the rocks or wherever, and it just happened to be sufficiently tenuous and resilient enough to be able to adapt to its surroundings, out of which every single life form on this planet evolved.

The Tree of Life has myriad branches, and to each branch can be tagged every single life form that has ever existed on this planet, including Man.

All of Man's characteristics - intelligence, analytical thought, love of music, language, dexterity etc, their origins can all be deduced and rationalised due to the dilemma facing the pair of them when they first learnt to stand comfortably on their hind legs and were able to make love facing each other.

THERE IS NO GOD.

These painful facts will not be accepted by most people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whether or not God exists, I cannot say. For sure though, a spirit world does indeed exist, and it is the world that people retreat or withdraw into when the real world gets too difficult to handle.

I grew up in a severely dysfunctional family where there was precious little love shown between my parents, and where any notion of a God was also absent.

I have lately got to know a woman whose love and belief in God is supreme. She reads the Bible every day and always says a prayer every night before going to sleep.

If I have to make a choice between no God and artificial love from an uncaring mother, or real love and belief in God from a loving woman, I'll go for God any day of the week.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Could it be that the so-called super-natural experiences are simply ones that we have yet been unable to explain scientifically. Some physicists claim that reality is made up of up to 11 dimensions, perhaps these experiences are glimses into these realities. We call these realities God or Saints or Angels or the Devil. True or False?
Yours,
RR

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I love my atheist brothers and sisters, but I regard them as naive materialists.

When atheists say there is no evidence for the existence of God, they are almost invariably talking about physical evidence.

But it's naive to think one can prove the existence of a nonphysical being, such as God, by the use of physical evidence.

An analogy may help. If you're having a dream in which you are trying to convince the people in your dream of the existence of the waking world, there's no way you can do it, because your evidence is unavailable to that reality. They'll remain agnostic no matter what you do.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It seems pretty obvious he means "many of you, but not me".

And why is HE writing an article about believers? I see no indication he actually spoke to any, as a journalist might do. Why not write why he's an atheist? No "we", "ME". And have two or three other articles, from believers of different religions, and an agnostic, which seems to be the group he understands the least. Not that there's any impression he moved outside his own head and dealt with actual people; his writing seems to deal with his preconceptions, which his expounds upon as if he understood the people he was writing about to begin with.

It gets him and us nowhere. Is the atheist goal, like the fundamentalist goal, conversion? These articles give the impression of a hope for some purified culture that is finally fit for the writer to live in. The more I read these days, the more I think that there is too much fascist thinking in our country. Although the content of the ideologies differs, the pattern of thought seems identical, except for the large despised group in the center-left, which mostly consists of Democrats. And the very thing we're despised for is NOT attempting to force anyone to either be like us, or live under rule that takes us and only us into account. When we're criticized first and foremost for being "centrist", as if we didn't want Bush to be one, and when the words "compromise" and "consensus" are now used to as terms of the ridiculous, you have to wonder what the nation would be like if any of these small groups managed to get some actual power. The words "thought police" in my own head don't apply any longer to Republicans. Not exclusively, anyway.

Not only do most of those who have a strong point of view seem passionate about it (good, and understandable), they seem to have a need to ram it down throats that is very familiar, because it's the way Republicans handle government when they're in charge. NOT good, NOT understandable. The 4% of you who are atheists should talk about yourselves all you want, but give up this author's idea that we should shape up, not speak our own faith and experience, for your comfort. And write about yourselves exclusively, until the day comes when you actually ask others about themselves. The less-than-1% who are vegans, ditto. Independent voters are really baffling. You got around 1.2% of the vote, (that total was far lower than polls) but seem to make up around 25% of the electorate, as far as I can tell through google. But like all the other ideologues, you write as if something is wrong with everyone else. If Republicans and Democrats make up around 75% of registered voters, and STILL you only get 1/25 or so of your own constituency to vote for your candidates, it's just possible that you and not we are doing something wrong.

How about we accept what nation we live in and shape up ourselves and live and let live? We'll each believe whatever our lives have led us to believe, we'll each vote according to the dictates of our own consciences, we'll respect that those who don't vote for our candidates still have working brains and used them, and we'll trust each other to actually gather information and decide the personal aspects of our lives for ourselves. Seems to have been the point of this nation all along, right?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The author doesn't distinguish between levels. We are composed of mind, body and spirit. The body does not fear the bear in the living room, it's the mind. If a person grew up with the bear, being in the living room is no big deal. The mind decides.

To the larger point, there is something in this force we call Life which is perhaps greater than the term gives credit to. There is also this curious point in time, now, where all of life happens and where time intersects eternity.

Of course there is no anthropomorphic God as so many religions ascribe, but that does not preclude the existence of an energy behind, beyond and within us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's simple: religion is a method of control over the great mass of the riff-raff.

It has been so since the days of the Pharaohs.

Conversely, it has also served the ruthless and ruling people in the world--giving legitimacy and convincing them of the moral justification of their exploitation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Belief in a supreme being(s) comes with an army of "priests" to manage the worship of the invisable one and create an owner's manual/Bible to guide the worshipers to better behavior. Worship is a gathering of those with similar beliefs and needs to share their lives/worship. Statues help visualize who is being worshiped with singing and occasional dancing adding to the level of participation. We feel good doing and being seen doing the worship by our fellow worshipers as a demonstration of piety and acceptance of the communal faith. As George Carlin would say, the guy in the sky is all powerful - he just can't manage money!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't think god has anything to do with a need for meaning, I think the concept of god has more to do with our tendency towards intuitive thinking, the way we perceive patterns as significant and our tendency to anthropomorphise just about anything.

Give a person a plausible explanation for patterns that he deems significant, appeal to his emotions and make something up that cannot be either proven or disproven because of it's non-physical nature (like the curvature earth and other things that can be proven with physics), and there's no reason why that person should reject that explanation as false, especially if lots of people around him think it's a pretty good explanation too.

And really, one could argue that atheists are no better off than theists, but then that means that theists are no better off than atheists either. So whether one believes in god or not has nothing at all to do with anything, except that the belief in certain types of gods are a shared cultural trait.

The main reason I'm an atheist is because I was never really part of any overtly religious cultural group, so it was easy for me to figure out that religion is simply one of the many things that some people do that doesn't make a whole lot of sense except that it meshes well with the way people's minds work.

Other than feeling kind of bored with the encounters you sometimes get with people who cannot accept that religion is just a thought process that some people have and some people don't to various degrees, my disbelief is no more an asset or a disadvantage to me than other peoples' belief.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I can't believe I just read two pages of someone shooting down Richard Dawkins under the presumption he's doing something impressive. Dawkins, outspoken as he is, does not speak for all atheists any more than Al Sharpton speaks for all black people or Rush Limbaugh speaks for all conservatives.

Atheism is only an actively-pursued worldview to the masses who just want to swing from one belief-branch to another. For us in the scientific community, it can sometimes just be a byproduct of our line of work. I didn't wake up one morning and call God a delusion, and I don't face an 'atheists dilemma.' I just have no belief towards anything that can't be presented to me as evidence, such as God, because of the way I've been conditioned in my upbringing and subsequent higher education. So, yes, I don't believe in God, vis a vis, atheism. I'm also making a stellar living in this economy and have quite an active libido, thank you very much.


Jesus, I can't believe there are publications out there that find this drivel passable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's Gone ALL WHITE

Not only is it Snowing But it is already getting REALLY THICK

London is Going To Be Laughing Tomorrow

At The Demo's

With all the Global Warming Fanatics with Their Banners saying the World is Getting Warmer due To Cows Farting

Tomorrow the Kids will Be ski-ing and sledging in our local park

I might even have a go myself

Pure Physics does not support the theory that increased levels of CO2 causes cows to fart.

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our God is that thing in the Sky commonly known as The SUN

When the SUN is getting excited perhaps because he has just seen another beautiful Star in the SKY and he thinks he may stand a chance of meeting her and creating a SuperNova

He gets excited and starts to warm up a bit and produce lots of sunspot and other forms of radiation

The Sun thinks he is in with a chance od a decent Shag

But then his beautiful star gets pulled by another gravitational force in the universe

He's not sure whether or not he is going to get his girl or not

And the Sun gets a bit down depressed thinking he has lost his girl

And it gets colder on Earth

Meanwhile us humans on this little planet earth thinks we have an effect on the Climate

We certainly have an effect at turning our planet into a toilet - but our effect on the climate is immeasurable compared to how our Sun is feeling

And by the way - if our Sun meets his Girlfriend and Two Suns - a Boy Sun and a Girl Sun from a completely different part of the Universe actually have sex

The chances of life survivibg on earth will be pretty slim as we get immediately blown several light years away

However our Sun will make lots more planets with his New Wife

And some of them might be as Beautiful as OUR Planet Earth

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let’s get real for a minute. The reason people believe in God is the mostly for the same reason they drink Coca-Cola: good marketing. It’s not like people wake up one morning and think to themselves “today I am going to believe in something that I cannot observe with my six senses” (The sixth sense is the inherent knowledge that your body is right side up and not upside down). There are literally tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of people working tirelessly to market the product of religion, and here is how they do it:

Marketing Religion:

First, make a religious text. A good religious text mixes history with supernatural stories and also includes a set of morals. Print out millions of copies to distribute.

Next, set up shop. Pick valuable real estate in highly visible and high-traffic areas.

Employ flamboyant, charismatic spokespeople.

Infiltrate government. When possible, have government make the religion a state-religion and have non-membership punishable by death. Also, lobby government for tax-exempt status and subsidies.

Advertise in newspapers, door-to-door, and public places when possible. Put religious services on TV to serve as an infomercials. Create 24-hour TV stations to serve as never-ending infomercials.

Encourage members to include their children in the religion from birth. That way, the children will be customers of the religion by default. It also helps ensure that the religion keeps going forever.

Search for new markets with your target demographic and a receptive government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Essex boys will wake up and look at this stuff and think FUCK what is THIS?

How the hell can I get to my City Desk by 8:00am?

Tony is going to be phoning me to buy snow and I won't be there

Southern Softies

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I mean no disrespect to the author, but after reading this essay I feel no more enlightened than I did before I started it. The author's conclusion that people believe in God because they prefer a false answer to no answer at all strikes me as shallow, superficial, and uninformative. I suggest that belief in God has to do with our evolutionary history. There is some evidence in the field of evolutionary psychology that suggests a natural selection origin to belief in the supernatural. While not yet conclusive, this idea strikes me as having more explanatory power than the one offered by the auithor of this essay.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh, this is about god. oops. Well, god is good if that's what you believe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm sure Larry's articles have impressed some 24-year-old grad student rebelling against his evangelical parents, but c'mon AlterNet, where's the beef? I've yet to read anything of substance in this series.

People believe in God or gods because human beings naturally attribute personality and intention to things they don't understand. The average person can do little else but explain complex aspects of the world through metaphors based on human nature itself. In earlier days, we crafted metaphors based on the human body - the great father god masturbates and ejaculates the world, or some such shit - and when we started to get a bit more self-aware and sophisticated, we based our metaphors on human emotions and mental processes.

In the West, the fear of mortality has been woven into belief in God, but this is not the cause of belief in God, or even a universal feature of theism. There are forms of theism, such as certain schools of Judaism, which have no clear belief in the afterlife. People aren't really that scared by the thought that death is the end of consciousness. Many people, in fact, hope for that when their lives have degenerated into nothing but hopeless pain.

People fight for their belief in God because they want to believe that the way they see the world is sound and in tune with the way things really are. Understanding the workings of the universe in human-based terms is deeply satisfying, intuitive, and effortless (most of the time). People who get beyond their belief in a human-like God are people who have had challenging lives that shatter all their assumptions and preconceptions. Most people would rather keep their lamp shades over their heads.

American religion has frittered away any awareness that God is ineffable and transcendent. Americans have been so determined to make God a warm-and-fuzzy who cares about them that they've gladly done away with any idea that human language about God is limited and metaphorical, and that the truth about God is beyond our ability to understand. The tragedy of such a human-defined God, where the metaphors are stretched well beyond their breaking points and no one notices, is that a human God has human faults.

But let's keep in mind that the average IQ is 100. That's STUPID, people. Such a person can't even program their own TV. Is such a person seriously going to understand talk about God's ineffability, the contradictions of definition and infinity, etc.? Of course not. A nice, fatherly God of love will always have great appeal to the average person. That isn't necessarily bad, as long as the average person knows that there are mysteries beyond their understanding, and that their simple beliefs can't be made into dogmas that limit the ability of smarter folks to speculate, investigate, and debate things that are beyond the average person's ability to grok.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Creation or Evolution?

Why are there no exceptions to the laws of physics? Why does night follow day, the seasons follow one another, the stars and planets continue on course?

Most Christians believe that the regularity, the design evident in the universe, points to God, a supreme creative Intelligence.

Some scientists believe the universe is pointless, without rhyme or reason; that the human race is not the center piece, but a freak accident, the by-product of pointless material forces in a back water of the universe.

Others believe it is reasonable to believe in God the Creator, concluding from a study of the scientific evidence that a Supreme Intelligence is at work.

We do not believe God is like a super clockmaker, who then wound up the universe and left it to itself. We do not believe only in a god of the gaps, whom we use when we have no scientific explanation. We see God in the laws of nature. We do not believe in God because we need to do so, nor because we prefer to believe, as we prefer spaghetti rather than roast lamb and mint sauce. God often helps us feel good, but that is not a good reason to believe

Many of us believe the universe has been fine-tuned for the existence of humans, that a place for humans was built into the universe from the beginning. In fact, we believe the cosmos was made with us in mind. What evidence is there for this?

An enormous number of coincidences enable human life to exist. If the earth was smaller, gravity would be too weak to retain an atmosphere. If it were much bigger there would be too much hydrogen. If we were much closer to the sun it would be too hot for liquid water; if we were much further away it would be too cold for us.

Almost one hundred chemical elements occur in nature, the smallest being hydrogen, which appeared soon after the Big Bang. Nearly all the other elements were forged later when giant stars exploded. Most of the elements in our bodies were made in explosions before our sun was born.

If the force holding the hydrogen nuclei together had been much weaker, the process could not have gone past hydrogen. If this force had been only a bit stronger, the stars would have burned themselves out in millions of years, not the billions of years needed to produce life.

The production of life has depended on a fantastic and delicate balance of forces. If the nature of space had been slightly different the universe could have collapsed a fraction of a second after it began; or undergone such ferocious expansion that all matter, even atoms, would have been torn apart quickly.

We know now that neither the earth nor the sun is the centre of the universe. Our sun is like a pebble on an immense beach. Why is the universe so large?

If the universe was the size of Europe it would have lasted a few milliseconds. A universe the size of our solar system would have lasted a few hours.

To claim these coincidences and many others are the product of chance is like claiming a runaway truck in a rubbish dump produced the Mona Lisa.

To sum it all up (E-equals-MxC2) shows energy and matter can not be created or destroyed by any mechanism known to man and yet one or the other or both had to come in existence at sometime or nothing we now know including mankind itself would exist. Therefore, even if a Bible that tells who created all did not exist, the universe and all in it would clearly show the existence of a Creator.

Useful links (not mine):

http://www.geocities.com/davidjayjordan /EvolutionisaBIGLIE.html [reconnect where space is]

http://www.watchtower.org/library/g/2000/8/22a
Iris89

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Its no wonder that there are many agnostics and atheist since there are over 33,000+ sects and/or groups all believing and propagating different things which is the promoting of many false religions under the broad umbrella of the taxonomy of being Christian. However, it should be obvious to any thinking individual that 33,000+ different ways can NOT all be correct, so what we in effect have is a very large maze that one must transverse to get to the real truth since all but one would only be dead ends.

Of course, in order to do this, one can NOT examine each in detail, but must therefore seek to learn what the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH), Creator of all that exist, the Bible, really teaches. But this is no easy task.

But let's consider the two taxonomies or distinct classifications of what is commonly referred to as Christianity. Realizing that some view gaining salvation as and easy task and feel that belonging to any old religion is acceptable to Almighty God (YHWH), but is it? Let's look at some facts, realities in keeping with John 8:32, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (Authorized King James Bible; AV).

Now let's look at the two different taxonomies and carefully note what sets them apart from each other:

Group 1 - the genuine (true) followers of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ do NOT involve themselves with war and violence or meddle in politics, and try to follow to the 'letter' the words and commandments of Christ. Also, they have NO creedal doctrines and/or traditions.

Group 2 - the false claimants [[often referred to as Christendom]] of being followers of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ involve themselves with war and violence and meddle in politics while falsely claiming to be followers of Christ, the Prince of Peace. The give 'lip' service with respect following to the 'letter' the words and commandments of Christ - the term Sunday Christian aptly fits them. They have their creedal doctrines and/or traditions and assign more importance to these than the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH), the Bible.

As can readily be seen, Group 1 does not involve itself with nationalism and racism but readily recognizes the Biblical reality of no partiality as shown at Romans 2:11 and elsewhere, "for there is no respect of persons with God." (American Standard Version: ASV). Also, this group strives to follow the 'letter' of the commandments of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ and Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH), Creator of all that exist, the Bible; and NOT the creeds and creedal doctrines of men who give themselves high sounding titles.

Whereas, Group 2 only gives 'lip service' to commandments of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ and Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH), Creator of all that exist, the Bible. The self evident truth being:

So, clearly, it is NOT my taxonomy but reality that sets the two groups clearly apart as separate classifications. Also, it is not my opinion that sets the two separate groups that are called "Christians" apart, but clearly the diametrically opposed actions of the two groups.

In fact, the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH), the Bible, clearly demonstrates how difficult it really is not to be mislead by the Devil and the religious leaders of evil false religions under control of the god of this system of things. This was clearly shown by Almighty God's (YHWH's) Son, Jesus (Yeshua), in answering a question asked of him at Luke 13:23-30, "And one said unto him, Lord, are they few that are saved? And he said unto them, 24 Strive to enter in by the narrow door: for many, I say unto you, shall seek to enter in, and shall not be able. 25 When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, open to us; and he shall answer and say to you,

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I know you not whence ye are; 26 then shall ye begin to say, We did eat and drink in thy presence, and thou didst teach in our streets; 27 and he shall say, I tell you, I know not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity. 28 There shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and yourselves cast forth without. 29 And they shall come from the east and west, and from the north and south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God. 30 And behold, there are last who shall be first, and there are first who shall be last." (ASV).

Also, Jesus (Yeshua) clearly showed his genuine (true) followers would be few in number compared to the total number of mankind. Let's consider both Luke 13:24 and Matthew 7:13-14, it is in both of these that the road followed by true believers would be narrow and cramped, Luke 13:24, "Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able." (Authorized King James Bible: AV); And Matthew 7:13-14, "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, abroad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." (AV); thereby, clearly showing few would be entering the narrow gate "which leadeth unto life." In reality, it will be difficult for even true Christians to enter as testified to at 1 Peter 4:18, "And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear." (AV). In order to enter, we must have the right sort of guide, Luke 1:79, "To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace." (AV). Now, if one picks the wrong group, just because it is popular or the so called 'one to belong to in a community' and not because of Bible Truths, there is an important warning given at Matthew 15:14, "Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." (AV). In fact, being with the wrong group can mean you are NOT having fellowship with the Son of God, Jesus (Yeshua) as testified to at 1 John 1:6, "If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not [have] the truth." (AV). This danger is made abundantly clear at Luke 12:32 when Jesus (Yeshua) spoke of his true followers as a little flock and not a large one, "Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom." (AV). Simply stated, his true followers will be relatively few in number which should cause all sincere individuals to question whether mainstream religion with its vast membership is heading for the narrow gate!

Now being this is the case, it behooves all genuine (true) followers of Jesus (Yeshua) to show neighbor love and warn their neighbors of the need to seek genuine salvation and to get OUT OF EVIL FALSE RELIGION regardless of what it is called or how long their families and friends have been members of it. This would be required by what Jesus (Yeshua) said at Matthew 22:37-40, "And he said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second like unto it is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 40 On these two commandments the whole law hangeth, and the prophets." (ASV).

Iris89

Ps: For more information, go to,

http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I once debated this topic with an atheist friend of mine. Both realizing we were not going to convince the other, the debate was at an impasse. Finally I put it like this. "If you and I both died right now and you are correct then we will both be in nothingness. Unaware and no less for wear for each of our beliefs. However if I am right then I will be in Heaven enjoying eternal peace and you will be in Hell suffering eternal torment. So who's being foolish?"
You see you have everything to gain and nothing to lose. If you really want to know if God exists just ask Him.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here is a letter I received from a Biologist:

as a biologist i am often saturated by evolutionary teachings. i dont know
much about textual criticism but i do know evolution/creation. so i thought i
would share thoughts about what i know:

according to some evolutionary theories our ancestor that branched into the
human lineage and chimp lineage existed seven million yrs ago. it is also
stated that we have about 3 billion base pairs in our dna which 3% or 90
million is expressed or used. compared to chimps there is only about a 1%
difference from our base pairs to theirs.in other words their dna matches ours
by about 99% which accounts for similarities.so only only 1% of 90 mill or
about 90,000 base pairs in our dna is really what makes us human.

well to many this proves evolution.it doesn't.according to this there were
90,000 mutations in only 7 mill yrs. all these mutations had to be profitable
(mutations are harmful the majority of the time i.e.cancer)they had to be
retained and passed on to the next generation.this is so unlikely. if we had a
mutation in our pelvis/spinal column that favored pernament upright mvt or a
mutation is our skin cells that shed all our chimp hair how did the mutations
migraten into our sperm/ovaries. mutations anywhere else would simply die with
us. they would have to occur in the sex cells to be passed on. not to mention
the present rate of mutation in our sex cells is about 1/10,000 or 1/100,000
generations so it is impossible to have occured in 7 mill yrs. some who try
and say evolution is a product of god use this to show only divine
intervention could of made such mutations.........i feel this proves it is
impossible.

so why do we resemble lower animals? it is simple: we all came from the SAME
god and were created by the SAME elements and live in the SAME environment
so we should expect such similarities.


now my question: could someone give me a pretty good list of stative verbs or
is "was" and "is" the only ones? and what exactly qualifies something as a
predicate nominative ? is it simply they are connected by stative verbs? my
question stems from a point broth stafford made that many examples people use
to show the nwt is not faithful to there translation principle of an
anarthrous theos are not predicate nominatives and so i want to know what
makes something such?................................................thanx
jason gagliano

Iris89

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...is the by-product of having loved someone other than yourself. No law can impose morality, although it can impose, through fear, ethical behavior. Whether we talk of religious law or secular, it is the same. Law is a poor substitute for real compassion. It was created for those that need it, like locks on doors. They keep the honest honest, and remove temptation from those who are slightly less so. For those whom have no conscience no lock will keep them out. The laws will then be picked over for loopholes by those with no conscience in order to negate and render impotent those locks.

I have more respect for someone that treats the persons and property of others gently because they have compassion than for those that claim to do so because 'God said so'. Some seek religion because they are trying to be better people. Others do it for social profit. While I admit that there are some professions for which decent conduct can be less than obvious, for example the medical and scientific fields, for the most part we all know that if we lack complete understanding then we can at least err on the side of compassion. In these cases 'ethics' have a place.

I have known people who have accomplished things that were supposed to be impossible. A man I knew was shipwrecked and swam 3 miles in icy ocean waters without flotation or thermal insulation, and survived. By all accounts this is impossible, and he should have died after 15 minutes in that water. I guess nobody told him what was or was not impossible.

The same goes for humanity, whether inventors or scientists. We do not accept the impossible. This is not to say that we break any natural laws. We simply refuse to accept that mankind cannot fly, and we learn higher laws that will enable us to accomplish our will. In an infinite universe nothing is impossible. We are limited only by our imagination, understanding, and our will. Einstein himself said that 'imagination brings all things into the realm of possibility'.

A purely materialistic perspective has no logical system which can justify selfless behavior. Even atheists must have their 'heros', those who act selflessly and sacrifice of themselves for the greater good. They must settle for the illogic of loving. This is sufficient for me.

I posit that any honest reading of the Gospels will prove this very point to Christians. Christ (myth or literary heroic figure - take your pick) was the answer to law. If the law justified anyone then Christ died for nothing, and the only laws he was concerned with were those of love. Agnostics will have to forgive one of their brethren for seeking to understand the perspective of spirituality, and trying to build bridges rather than walls.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's all based on fear.

Fear of women and death.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

to search for patterns and meaning, but not to embrace illusions in order to satisfy this need. For me, it's enough to wonder. I think I'm also hardwired to embrace enthalpy rather than entropy, or chaos. I am compelled to connect -- and love. Religions tend to seek to transform this healthy compulsion into conformity to power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My concept of God has changed dramatically from my early Christian upbringing. But I still have a level of belief in a Higher Power.

Although raised as a Catholic, I never really believed "literally" in the biblical accounts of God and religion. I was fond of a quote, "God created man in his own Image, and man promptly returned the favor". It's not that I found no truth in religion, I just had a hard time accepting it verbatim.
I compromised this issue by secretly considering any biblical message I considered an insult to my intelligence, as being a parable that had to be unscrambled and the real message extracted.
This got me through for many years, until I was near 40 years old, Had not been to mass or confession for years, and had long left the circles where religion, (or lack thereof), were factors.
It was then that I decided to believe in only one thing, a higher Power.

No matter how I have tried, I cannot fathom certain concepts such as the beginning of being, and the idea of infinity. However I know that mathematicians and scientists have proven these concepts to be truths. When someone of great intellectual and mathematical wisdom has taken the time to painstakingly, and in layman’s terms explain the Big Bang Theory to me. My childlike mind will always want to know what was here prior to that and how it was manifested. No one I have met yet can REALLY get their head around that.
So, whatever THAT force is, has become my higher power.
I have no desire to have my personal belief inflicted upon others, and even less to have theirs inflicted upon me. I have never been pressured by anyone, devoutly religious or atheist to prescribe to their point of view, that a simple "No thanks" was not sufficient to dissuade them from continuing.
When someone begins speaking about GOD these days, I just think about the acronym "Good Orderly Direction",
Unlike the late, great Hunter Thompson, I still believe that something or someone is minding the light at the end of the tunnel.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

exhibit A: Even if it's not true, if you accept it, the pain suddenly stops.

False. It doesn't stop. It's like taking painkillers when pain is telling you to stop doing that which causes you pain: you take too many pain killers, feel great and go tear the shit out of your groin muscle and now your pro-sports career is fucked.

My personal experience and that of many many others is that believing the lie doesn't stop the pain. Acceptance of the "no answer" stops the pain instead.

Beinhart, you're a tool because you assume too presumptively and simply. You're ignoring the much larger group that simply doesn't fit your stereotype.

Because a false answer is better than no answer at all. And that's our only choice, no answer or a false one.

Um, no, it's not. Accepting that false answer, especially when you know it's a false answer is actually the CAUSE of MORE psychic pain not less!

The no answer choice is actually more productive, less painful and allows us to own our own shit. That's at least honest.

Accepting the false one is the proximate cause of much much more suffering. And THAT needs to stop.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our being is built to keep pushing itself. The chemical goads don't relent. The pain does not stop.

At this point we have a choice.

We can accept that this particular need can't be satisfied. That our knowledge is insufficient. Or, in modern times, that the universe does not mean anything in the terms we want to hear about.

Until someone creative comes along and says, "I have an answer. There's a God."

Or, between these two extremes, we can do what you suggest in the first sentence quoted above: we can continue to strive for greater understanding through all of the tools available to us. This need drives the search for both scientific and religious truths. You write as if humanity has already reached the limits of understanding. We will not know if this is true unless we continue to push those limits through all avenues.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

apparently...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The reason that people believe in God is even more varied than human sexuality.
But there is one thing that ties it all together and the writer approached but didn't quite grasp it:
The fact that meaning has meaning is the only evidence that might be evidence for God's existence. Put another way, the world being meaningful rather than absurd helps explain why there is Something that people have a wide variety of conjectures about. That there is that Something and that that Something should command respect is a commonality, but a commonality which is interfered with by all sorts of people who hold power but who shouldn't hold power; at least they should not hold as much power as they do by virtue of controlling how we interpret what the this meaning-regulator Something Is.
I am of the opinion that the time of authoritarian religion is past; at least it is if people are willing to play by the Golden Rule with each other, and do the best they know how to do, and learn from their mistakes when they don't know the best thing to do.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The line of development in individuals goes from belief in a mythic Daddy god in the sky to existential Death of that mythic God, to awakening to Spirit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

thaks

şömine
şömine
şömine
şömine
baca

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An atheist looks at a starry night sky, a flower, a baby, a magnificent oak tree, a beautiful woman, etc., and can see no evidence of a creator. How pitiful!
When I look around, all I see everywhere is proof / evidence of a divine source.
As for all the harm that we humans inflict on other humans and our environment... well, that's called freedom of choice!
The political left will never be either a progressive or a popular movement until we denounce atheism for the arrogant sham that it is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I believe the title of this article is "Why Do People Believe In God?" so one might expect answers from those persons who do believe in God to explain their reasons. Invariably on these blogs, some unbelievers spout vitriol. Maybe they should wait for the article that asks "Why Don't People Believe In God?" to give their reasons. There's plenty of room for disagreement, but animosity is unnecessary.

I have read the Bible countless times for more than