I have always been confused about religion. I don't know if I believe in God or not. I am a person of reason and hard facts. To me, if I can see it, hear it, or touch it it's real. To me, it just seems like facts against God are more logical than facts for God. I want to believe in God, but there are so many questions unanswered. Can anyone give me an logical argument that can semi-prove God's existence?

jillianleab

Please. Have you even ever met an atheist? Apparently not...

rudi_in

I worded that the way I did because it appears as though worthbeads may feel this way. If he chooses to ignore his feelings, he may very well grow old with a sense of unfulfillment or emptiness.


I have actually met several. I have even met many followers of other faiths as well. I am not so secluded that I have not experienced parts of the world and various people within it.

I have many places yet to go and much to learn but don't sell me so short so soon.

It does not seem fair to assume that I am ignorant in this way based solely on a single response that I gave to someone who shared their feelings.

These are merely some thoughts for worthbeads to consider or not.

Capuchin

Speech, I believe we have agreed to disagree on this before, why does science seek to reduce man to chemical processes?

Because man is chemical processes. That's why. We are bags of mostly salty water. I know you won't like that description, but that's exactly what we are.

Why does religion seek to complicate the observable world with something which is not observable and non-falsifiable? The vast majority of things that we observe can be explained by science (and more will be explained in the future), yet you chuckle when a scientific explanation is put forth. Why?

Starman

Here is a website that will answer many questions for you.
All About The Journey & Does God Exist Scientifically?

firmbeliever

I can answer why I believe what I believe in the light of Islam,but then as worthbeads thoughts are on a Christian path, I refrain from quoting from what I believe...

That being said I agree with those saying its takes faith to believe in Science and the Creator together without having a war with our conscience.
If one leaves science and believes only in the Creator,then that makes one very ignorant of the miracles that exist in the universe.
And those who have faith in science and not in the Creator is also missing out....(I believe even if a person does not realise this, the soul yearns to receive guidance, love,be loved and depend on a higher being)

inthebox

Off topic, but it reminds me of the Star Trek episode when a pile of mostly carbon based chemicals lay on the floor after these humans were dehydrated.



Grace and Peace

NeedKarma

Yes, children require loving parents to become well adjusted adults who then mate with a similar well adjusted adult to love and be loved. I do not believe in this inate need for higher spiritual power or else every single human being would feel that and that is certainly not the case.

speechlesstx

Capuchin, believe me I understand the science of man and I understand and appreciate what that science has done for man, so I'll get to your questions.


Religion doesn't seek to complicate the observable world, it is not out to destroy, demonize or dismiss science. Science cannot explain everything in spite of the many presumptuous attempts to do so, neither can religion of course, but they don't have to be incompatible. I admit I can't prove the existence of God, but scientists seems to assume they'll eventually be able to explain everything. How do you reduce a thought down to a series of chemical reactions and electrical impulses? How do you explain falling in love as chemical reactions and survival instinct? These things are so much more profound than reducing it to instinct and chemical processes, and if science can't see that one should wonder just how intelligent these scientists are.


Like I said, life - especially human life - is so much more profound than paleocircuits and "neural platforms for bodily expression." It devalues mankind, it reduces us to being worth nothing more than a handful of dust, or "salty water" as you put it. Salty water is great for making pasta and taffy, but a human being is worth so much more. We can laugh, love, cry and reason, that is much more than science can ever fully explain.

jillianleab

rudi, I didn't mean for my comment to sound as rude as it did. I wasn't trying to sell you short, but rather point out the flaw in your logic. You're saying an atheist always has an underlying desire to believe, that they have an emptiness inside them, and frankly, that's just not true. I'm going to go bold here and say every atheist on this site feels quite "full" and does not feel there is something lacking in their life; at least not something that can be filled by belief in god (cause I'd really like a burger right now.... ). My point is your statement does not apply to the majority of atheists. I mean, if you don't feel satisfied by your lack of belief, why not seek out a belief? I think for most people it can be said if your belief system isn't working for you, you find one that does. For an atheist this is an easy jump because we never worry if we stop not believing in god we will go to hell. For a Christian to consider switching religions it's a much more involved process, as you have to consider you might go to hell for changing your beliefs. Atheists don't have that problem. We're all going to hell anyway! See you there, Cap, NK and my other buddies!

jillianleab

speech I think the difference is you have a romanticized view of human life. You attribute something profound to love, hate, etc instead of looking at it from a scientific POV and attributing electrical pulses to such feelings. To a scientist, or someone who follows the scientific line of thinking, we aren't anything special. We're just bags of salty water with lots of electricity running through us. When you break it down, that's what a human is; we're flesh, blood, bone, water, gooey stuff, and there's all sorts of electricity running around in there too. On the LITERAL surface, that's a human. Scientists think on the literal surface. You, and many others, want there to be more than that to humans; it's romanticizing scientific reasoning. You can hook someone up to fancy machines and show them images to demonstrate the electrical impulses of feelings. It can actually be seen, certain parts of the brain light up when certain things happen. That's how scientists explain emotions - they can be seen.

I'm not saying you are wrong or less intelligent for thinking this way - I know you're a smart guy. But I think your religious beliefs lead you to think this way, whereas someone without religious beliefs looks at the literal surface.