Top Ten Arguments for the existence of God easily deflated.

SATCHMO · 08-15-2010, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inuzuka Skysword

There is a pretty big difference between the idea of trusting the aircraft and acknowledging the existence of a god. There is evidence pointing towards the idea that the aircraft is safe. There is no evidence of god.

The airplane analogy was not given for the purpose of showing that there is a god, but to demonstrate that humans engage in acts of faith on a fairly regular basis, whether or not we are consciously aware of it. There is a tendency to believe that faith is an act that is engaged in only when there is no empirical evidence to support what we believe. That is simply not true, which is why atheism requires every bit as much faith as theism does.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inazuka Skysword

Why would religion make people happy? What does a religion have that understanding does not which enables one to be happier?

This presents a point of contention that I have with both sides of the theism issue, so in answering it I can only give you my own particular views, although I'm sure that they do represent the views of many others.

First, the term religion is a bit of a slippery one to work with. For one it represents a socio-political organization that is structured around a particular spiritual belief structure. There are people who have absolutely no affiliation with a particular religion and it's corresponding believe structure that receive a great deal of happiness through their own spiritual practices. Conversely, there are those that are actively involved in a particular religion that are miserable and simply use their religion for the actuation of their own misery. If being involved in a religion does not elevate one's consciousness then all one has done in becoming involved in one is joined a club, literally. Spirituality is, and religion should be, for the purpose of transcending the ego, and elevating one's level of consciousness.

There are many trappings that go along with our reliance on the ego, and while our ego does play a very important and practical part in navigating our reality, it is a very deceptive component of our psyche, as it forces us to be completely reliant on our sensory perceptions and the subjective way in which we analyze the respective data it provides us to formulate an assessment regarding the condition of our life, i.e. If something that we perceive as being "good" happens, we are happy. If something that we perceive as being "bad" happens, we are unhappy. Essentially we put ourselves in the situation where we are not just simply at the mercy of our external circumstances to dictate the quality of our life, we are at the mercy of our judgment regarding our perception of these circumstances to dictate the quality of our life.

Now what happens when we acknowledge the fact that these judgments that we make too many times a day to even mention, both consciously and unconsciously, are at best subjective, and at worst unreliable and even erroneous? I mean it is true, as much as you would like to be a proponent of the rational mind and its capacity for reasoning, the human mind's ability to comprehend the true nature of causality is extremely limited and the ego-driven mind is very much challenged to see anything circumstantial in anything but a non-linear way. What happens when we come to the understanding that the judgments that we make regarding the circumstances of our reality are anything but objective and rational, and have just as much impact on what we perceive as being our reality as the circumstances themselves? What happens when we rely instead on that which cannot be seen, but transcends the ego? The answer is that "happiness" becomes much less contingent upon, if not independent of, the external circumstances which we perceive as being reality, commensurately with the level at which our consciousness has been elevated through whatever spiritual practices we may happen to engage in, be they effective, or effectively practiced, at least.

If one chooses to "place their faith" in the minds ability to objectively apprehend and understand that which the senses provide it, over that which cannot be understood or apprehended through empirical means, then the purpose that human beings have for attempting to commune with the divine cannot be understood. In effect, the use of spiritual practice to transcend the trappings of the ego is the only way to bring about unconditional, true happiness, joy, which is not contingent upon external circumstances. And as anyone who has had an experience of this nature, be it momentary or long-term, it is well above and beyond any experience of happiness that can be provided through our own perception of what we would deem to be a positive circumstance.

chiron · 08-16-2010, 01:13 AM

The most convincing argument for religion I've read was made by Osho;

Quote:

Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Mohammedanism — these are only ideologies, dogmas, creeds; they are only cults. The true religion has no name, it cannot have any name. Buddha lived it, Jesus lived it — but remember, Jesus was not a Christian and Buddha was not a Buddhist, he had never heard of the word. The truly religious people have been simply religious, they have not been dogmatic. There are three hundred religions in the world — this is such an absurdity! If truth is one, how can there be three hundred religions? There is only one science, and three hundred religions?

If the science that is concerned with the objective truth is one, then religion is also one because it is concerned with the subjective truth, the other side of the truth. But that religion cannot have any name, it cannot have any ideology.

I teach only that religion. Hence if somebody asks you what my teaching is, in short, you will not be able to say — because I don't teach principles, ideologies, dogmas, doctrines. I teach you a religionless religion, I teach you the taste of it. I give you the method to become receptive to the divine. I don't say anything about the divine, I simply tell you "This is the window — open it and you will see the starry night."

Now, that starry night is indefinable. Once you see it through the open window you will know it. Seeing is knowing — and seeing should be being, too. There should be no other belief.

So my whole effort is existential, not intellectual at all. And the true religion is existential. It has always happened to only a few people and then it disappears from the earth because the intellectuals immediately grab it and they start making beautiful ideologies out of it — neat and clean, logical. In that very effort they destroy its beauty. They create philosophies, and religion disappears. The pundit, the scholar, the theologian, is the enemy of religion.

So remember it: you are not getting initiated into a certain religion; you are getting initiated into just religiousness. It is vast, immense, unbounded — it is like the whole sky.

Even the sky is not the limit, so open your wings without any fear. This whole existence belongs to us; this is our temple, this is our scripture. Less than that is manmade, manufactured by man. Where it is manufactured does not matter much — beware of manufactured religions so that you can know the true, which is not manmade. And it is available in the trees, in the mountains, in the rivers, in the stars — in you, in people that surround you — it is available everywhere.

Science is the search for truth in the objective world and religion is the search for the truth in the subjective world. In fact, they are two wings of one bird, of one inquiry — two sides. Ultimately there is no need to have two names. My own suggestion is that "science" is a perfectly beautiful name, because it means "knowing." So science has two sides, just like every coin has two sides. Knowing in the dimension of matter you can call objective science, and knowing in the dimension of your interiority — of your inner being, of your consciousness — you can call subjective science. There is no need for the word religion.

Science is perfectly good — and it is the same search, just the directions are different. And it will be good that we make one supreme science, which is a synthesis, a synchronicity of the outer science and the inner science. There will be no need of so many religions then, and there will be no need then even for somebody to be an atheist. When theists are gone, then there is no need for atheists — they are only reactions. There are believers in God so there are disbelievers in God. When the believers are gone, what is the need of disbelievers?

There is no need to believe in anything — that is the fundamental of science. That is the scientific approach to reality: do not believe, inquire. The moment you believe, inquiry stops. Keep your mind open — neither believe nor disbelieve. Just remain alert and search and doubt everything until you come to a point which is indubitable — that's what truth is. You cannot doubt it. It is not a question of believing in it, it is a totally different phenomenon. It is so much a certainty, overwhelming you so much, that there is no way to doubt it.

This is knowing. And this knowing transforms a man into a buddha, into an enlightened one. This is the goal of all human growth.

SATCHMO · 08-16-2010, 04:52 PM

^^^^^ That's very profound. I know that I've read something by or about him before.

MAStudent · 08-21-2010, 03:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiron

The most convincing argument for religion I've read was made by Osho;

Without the the trap of definition, this is a nice best effort

timptimp · 09-03-2010, 07:09 PM

no.9? do more people believe in god than do not? How many of these people are christains etc. just because theyre parents call them so and they dont care enough to say otherwise.
From my experience the majority dont believe in god, without actually saying he doesnt exist.

MAStudent · 09-04-2010, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiron

What I'd like to know is whether someone who has lived all his life without anyone ever mentioning the concept of god or a higher power feel the need for something like that from within.

I would say no. If you were raised by wolves on a desert island, you should encounter the real things in the world that exist. You would actually be free to name them as you saw fit. Allah, Eloh, Dios, Wakantankeh, watever you call it, God- if God is real you should encounter it, just like dirt, bananas, wind, loneliness, etc

MAStudent · 09-04-2010, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SATCHMO

There is a tendency to believe that faith is an act that is engaged in only when there is no empirical evidence to support what we believe. That is simply not true, which is why atheism requires every bit as much faith as theism does.

great point satch

MAStudent · 09-04-2010, 02:25 AM

Does God exist is an odd question.

Usually you have to define terms before you can discuss them. What does "God" mean?

I think people tend to gravitate to cosmologies that allow them to express their core parts with the least repercussions. That given, God has been defined many ways.

If you don't like restriction on your activities, you may tend to characterize God as a psychological production, born of primal need to explain things. That way any rules God might entail can't stop you.

If you need support, you might create God for yourself as some all-powerful, all knowing, all loving being.

If you can't accept "I don't know" as an explanation, you might fabricate God(s) to explain a few things.

Humans are just creepy monkeys. We are capable of all manner of mental fabrication, and may even believe what we have fabricated.

All these descriptions (and many more) are just expressions of the mind of the creepy monkey.

However, to try to ascertain truth in the atmosphere around us, in order to move forward authenticly, we should recognize these tendencies toward favorable hypothesies. If we really seek truth, and not a good story to get us through the night, we should choose explanations that occur repeatedly, that hold up under scrutiny, and that survive the natural naming of the world around us by humans (since we are human).

For me personally, there is no doubt a force that is bigger than me, that is independent, and that has some designs on me. I have run into it. It has made itself undeniably clear. I could do my best to describe it, but really my main wish is to know more about it. I feel inadequate to name it or define it well.

As far as a set of rules, guidelines, and behavioral funnels, I'm not sure. I tend to look at people like plants. What kind of fool are you? What do you need? We need to have our seeds for whatever make us up watered, and we need to be trimmed or edited a bit, to be our most fulfilled. It seems the big force wants us to be fulfilled, but its hard to posit specific powers and wants for God.

I just pray I can learn more about God, without being side-tracked and distracted by creepy monkey gibberish.

RVCA · 09-04-2010, 02:59 AM

I define God as the variable credited for setting everything we know in motion. I find the idea of a personal God (as put forth by Islam, Christianity, etc) ridiculous.

anti-war94 · 09-04-2010, 01:05 PM

Wow! I just read that whole thing and that was very interesting.
Now it gives me more reason to not believe in God, I already didn't, but now I can actually argue as to why I don't believe.

09-04-2010, 01:05 PM	#110 (permalink)
anti-war94 Groupie Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: USA Posts: 38	Wow! I just read that whole thing and that was very interesting. Now it gives me more reason to not believe in God, I already didn't, but now I can actually argue as to why I don't believe. __________________

08-16-2010, 04:52 PM	#103 (permalink)
SATCHMO Al Dente Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 4,708	^^^^^ That's very profound. I know that I've read something by or about him before.

09-03-2010, 07:09 PM	#105 (permalink)
timptimp Groupie Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 6	no.9? do more people believe in god than do not? How many of these people are christains etc. just because theyre parents call them so and they dont care enough to say otherwise. From my experience the majority dont believe in god, without actually saying he doesnt exist.

09-04-2010, 02:25 AM	#108 (permalink)
MAStudent Music Addict Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Eureka, CA Posts: 87	Does God exist is an odd question. Usually you have to define terms before you can discuss them. What does "God" mean? I think people tend to gravitate to cosmologies that allow them to express their core parts with the least repercussions. That given, God has been defined many ways. If you don't like restriction on your activities, you may tend to characterize God as a psychological production, born of primal need to explain things. That way any rules God might entail can't stop you. If you need support, you might create God for yourself as some all-powerful, all knowing, all loving being. If you can't accept "I don't know" as an explanation, you might fabricate God(s) to explain a few things. Humans are just creepy monkeys. We are capable of all manner of mental fabrication, and may even believe what we have fabricated. All these descriptions (and many more) are just expressions of the mind of the creepy monkey. However, to try to ascertain truth in the atmosphere around us, in order to move forward authenticly, we should recognize these tendencies toward favorable hypothesies. If we really seek truth, and not a good story to get us through the night, we should choose explanations that occur repeatedly, that hold up under scrutiny, and that survive the natural naming of the world around us by humans (since we are human). For me personally, there is no doubt a force that is bigger than me, that is independent, and that has some designs on me. I have run into it. It has made itself undeniably clear. I could do my best to describe it, but really my main wish is to know more about it. I feel inadequate to name it or define it well. As far as a set of rules, guidelines, and behavioral funnels, I'm not sure. I tend to look at people like plants. What kind of fool are you? What do you need? We need to have our seeds for whatever make us up watered, and we need to be trimmed or edited a bit, to be our most fulfilled. It seems the big force wants us to be fulfilled, but its hard to posit specific powers and wants for God. I just pray I can learn more about God, without being side-tracked and distracted by creepy monkey gibberish.

09-04-2010, 02:59 AM	#109 (permalink)
RVCA （￣ー￣） Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,270	I define God as the variable credited for setting everything we know in motion. I find the idea of a personal God (as put forth by Islam, Christianity, etc) ridiculous.