Ignosticism (Prove to me there is a God)

[lancelot]

Because if there is a God...you'll burn in Hell mate

I find it hard to fathom that "God" could give you freedom/ability to choose to not believe in him, then punish you for it when in the afterlife...thats just mean...

The best argument for the existence of God that I can think of is myself, my environment, and the rest of the world.

I find it hard to believe all of this - from the mountains and the oceans, to the microscopic cells that form them - just came about as a result of a big bang or coincidence.

Eh?

So a giant explosion is implausible as the cradle of life but an old robed geezer living on a cloud, smiting here and there when the mood takes him is a better explanation for existence...

You do realise how mental that sounds dont you?


My very simple take on God-

Do you believe in the existence of 'The Force' or Superman or Flying Pink Elephants? No? Then why is God somehow real? I cant see how anyone can claim belief in God but not in any other crazy stuff...

EDIT:- You know why else God and heaven and all that is cobblers? Because life isnt that perfect. No happy endings, everythings gonna be all right. Life just isnt that kind.

[Ronin]

I find it hard to fathom that "God" could give you freedom/ability to choose to not believe in him, then punish you for it when in the afterlife...thats just mean...

that´s always been one of the things i´ve found funnier about the christian/judaic (spelling?) faith...

the motto seems to be:

Eternal damnation and punishment awaits those who question God's unconditional love

talk about an oxymoron

[sharrukin]

If a video game construct became self-aware how would it prove its own existence? We are in a similar situation with regards to proving God's existence or lack thereof. God is said to have created all things. He existed before creation, and therefore exists outside of it. He is outside our reference system. The point is that if in fact God exists, then OBVIOUSLY you cannot prove it without him wanting you to. If you could prove his existence without him wanting you to, then he wouldn't be God. He would be a part of the system, rather than outside of it. As part of creation, or the 'system', there is logically no way for us to prove what he doesn't want proven. He is the great programmer in the sky.

http://www.simulation-argument.com/matrix.html

"If you are such a simulated mind, there might be no direct observational way for you to tell; the virtual reality that you would be living in would look and feel perfectly real. But all that this shows, so far, is that you could never be completely sure that you are not living in a simulation."

"The simulation hypothesis, however, may have some subtle effects on rational everyday behaviour. To the extent that you think that you understand the motives of the simulators, you can use that understanding to predict what will happen in the simulated world they created. If you think that there is a chance that the simulator of this world happens to be, say, a true-to-faith descendant of some contemporary Christian fundamentalist, you might conjecture that he or she has set up the simulation in such a way that the simulated beings will be rewarded or punished according to Christian moral criteria. An afterlife would, of course, be a real possibility for a simulated creature (who could either be continued in a different simulation after her death or even be “uploaded” into the simulator’s universe and perhaps be provided with an artificial body there)."

"If we are in a simulation, is it possible that we could know that for certain? If the simulators don’t want us to find out, we probably never will. But if they choose to reveal themselves, they could certainly do so."

Maybe Al Gore is God, after all he invented the Internet.

[Byzantine Prince]

When you stop caring about anything it ceases to exist. Things only exist so long as we give them a special meaning.

Nothing can exist as as such, outside the mind.

[rory_20_uk]

Surely that depends on what you view existence to be.

[Scurvy]

So a giant explosion is implausible as the cradle of life but an old robed geezer living on a cloud, smiting here and there when the mood takes him is a better explanation for existence...

You do realise how mental that sounds dont you?
.

Its no less mental than some of the scientific theories

I find it hard to believe that the "world" was created through science, because something must of created science, therefore whatever "caused" the world (ie. the first cause, Thomas Aquinas i think) must be God. In my opinion the real argument here is what is "God".
God doesnt necessarily have to be any religious interpretation, or even given any "human characteristsics", God is simply the first cause, the thing that created everything... It exists, but is of little importance now.

Csar --> Whats wrong with him being Catholic?

[Csargo]

Your sig says it all Scury. It says it all.

[Scurvy]

No it doesn't (or am i missing something really obvious?)

[lancelot]

Its no less mental than some of the scientific theories

I find it hard to believe that the "world" was created through science, because something must of created science, therefore whatever "caused" the world (ie. the first cause, Thomas Aquinas i think) must be God. In my opinion the real argument here is what is "God".
God doesnt necessarily have to be any religious interpretation, or even given any "human characteristsics", God is simply the first cause, the thing that created everything... It exists, but is of little importance now.

I really dont understand this desperate need to find some higher power behind everything, pulling the strings' as it were. Perhaps we did evolve out of an explosion or a puddle...perhaps it is that mundane...

And you say 'It exists' which implies that a someone or autonomous something had a direct hand in our universe's creation...perhaps the universe is a mistake or the least probable outcome in a random chain of events...

Let me try to explain God in a rational way.

God does not exist. However, I believe in It- more specifically, in Him, the male aspect of God. You see, the most plausible theory of God for me is that God is Life, and Life is God; but the two do not exist in the same way. They have interactions, but they are effectively impossible to comprehend. One example , though, may be how humans apparently may have eradicated all of the sentient apes, so that the human genus would have no competition: this may have been a drive stemming from the newly-sentient God, who saw a threat to Its existence and drove Humanity to destroy this threat, as It destroyed the threat on Its level. It was competing with other Gods, and It won.

Er...what? That makes no sense.

God is life and sent his killer humans to eradicate monkeys in a effort to give the finger to other gods????


I believe Thor was mad at Cerberus for stealing his lunch money so he gave him a wack over the head with his hammer, which in turn got Cerberus so mad he exploded and formed the universe. There- job done. Existence explained.

[Spetulhu]

You might wish to read what someone more critical has to say about hogwash like Intelligent Design before declaring for a higher power.

"When you think about it, a theory which can predict anything is actually a theory which predicts nothing. An open-ended "prediction" which is incapable of ever saying "no, we won't see that" is absolutely, utterly, completely useless. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is "intelligent design" theory in a nutshell: completely useless."

http://www.creationtheory.org/Essays...sUseless.shtml

[Reverend Joe]

Er...what? That makes no sense.

God is life and sent his killer humans to eradicate monkeys in a effort to give the finger to other gods????


I believe Thor was mad at Cerberus for stealing his lunch money so he gave him a wack over the head with his hammer, which in turn got Cerberus so mad he exploded and formed the universe. There- job done. Existence explained.

That's a tiny part of my own religious beliefs. And when I say "religion", I use a much looser form of the word than Divinus does; my version of Religion is simply a complex system of metaphysical and ethical beliefs; each person can have his own religion. I have my own, and it certainly has made life a lot more interesting.

But it is not really necessary. My main point was that I worry that DemonArchangel was dismissing God and religion for the worng reasons; but it appears he is not. He has his own religion. He si thinking for himself.


(I hope.)

[DemonArchangel]

But it is not really necessary. My main point was that I worry that DemonArchangel was dismissing God and religion for the worng reasons; but it appears he is not. He has his own religion. He is thinking for himself.

(I hope.)

I really do hope that I'm thinking for myself. I really don't like thinking for other people, it's really a drain on the brain.

[Ronin]

Its no less mental than some of the scientific theories

I find it hard to believe that the "world" was created through science, because something must of created science, therefore whatever "caused" the world (ie. the first cause, Thomas Aquinas i think) must be God. In my opinion the real argument here is what is "God".
God doesnt necessarily have to be any religious interpretation, or even given any "human characteristsics", God is simply the first cause, the thing that created everything... It exists, but is of little importance now.

Csar --> Whats wrong with him being Catholic?

to say that "the world was created through science" is a wrong position....the creation of the world was a natural process (I say this because I have never seen any proof of an unnactural process occuring), science is merely a model we use to try and understand the natural processes...

[BDC]

Claiming the universe is too complex to have been created without a god isn't going anywhere. You just shift everything up a level. Who made god? If the universe is so complex that it needs a creator, so does god, who was presumeably just as complex. And that needs a creator... And so forth forever.

[Jubilation T Cornpone]

You really needn't look any further than 'Red Dwarf' for an answer. Kryten summed it up nicely: 'Human Heaven? Goodness me, humans don't go to Heaven! No, someone made that up to prevent you all from going nuts!'

The only annoying thing is that when you all finally do die and nothing happens, none of you will actually realise it!

[Cowhead418]

You really needn't look any further than 'Red Dwarf' for an answer. Kryten summed it up nicely: 'Human Heaven? Goodness me, humans don't go to Heaven! No, someone made that up to prevent you all from going nuts!'

The only annoying thing is that when you all finally do die and nothing happens, none of you will actually realise it!

Hey! Someone with my exact views! There are a few points/views I'd like to make/raise:

@ Sasaki - I'm atheist but I still can't sleep in because I work on Sundays! There, your divinity is disproved.

@ DC - I have heard this argument several times. To put it in other words, you are telling me that I should believe in God because it is the convenient thing to do. I will not dispute this notion, though I think this argument is absurd. Yes, I would like to believe that after I die I will go to a paradise and everything will be fine and dandy. However, life rarely works out that way and I fail to see why I should make an exception here. There are many negative aspects of life that I'd like to not believe in, but sadly there is often no alternative option. Yes, many of these aspects are concrete and religion is not, but this argument just provides evidence to my theory that people believe in Heaven because they can't face up to the possibility that there is not happiness after death. To me it is why fairy tales are so popular. And it is also why you will sad endings are much rarer in books and movies. People just won't accept a 'bad' ending.

@ lancelot - it is a bit ridiculous, isn't it? I was raised Roman Catholic, and they preach that God's love is unconditional, and that he is very forgiving of even the most extreme of sins. Yet Christians hold the belief that the simple act of disputing the existence of said God is enough to damn you to the fiery pits of Hell for all eternity. I've even heard some Christians say that Gandhi is in Hell just for choosing not to believe in the Christian God. It doesn't paint a very loving or forgiving picture of God, does it? It seems to me that this God is not loving after all but actually evil and intolerant.

Finally, @ GB - I agree 100%. I do not believe there is a God and the arguments about the creation of the universe are absurd because the same arguments could be used against the existence of God. Also, my view of life after death is that there is none. After you die you go back to the same state you were before you were conceived - oblivion. Unfortunately, in this view, it means that we will never actually know if God existed, because after death we won't be able to say or think: "Oh, I guess I was wrong/right after all." On the bright side, at least we won't be able to think: "Well, this really sucks." Yes, it is quite a pessimistic view because we won't actually discover what death brings, and I hope it doesn't occur this way, but my beliefs are what they are.

[Quietus]

Never heard of Ignosticism before but I've had similar arguments months ago.

Understanding is a function of knowledge. No knowledge, no understanding. Hence one cannot define anything without any knowledge of it.

Example:
1) Define "Yfkgmaoggwokf". Try.
a) You have no knowledge nor any proof of "Yfkgmaoggwokf".
b) You can't define it either.
c) You can't claim it exists.

However, if you replace it with "GOD":
1) Define "God". Well?
a) You have no knowledge or proof of "God"
but magically,
b) God is the creator of the universe etc etc.
c) and God exists.