Feelings against Organized Religion

[Ka-El]

The true nature of knowing God is knowing that God is unknowable.

Though I agree, there is nothing we can know about God at present, that same fact is true about an infinite number of ideas.

<snip>

But if I'm to believe that there is a god somewhere out there pulling the strings, then why would I be so arrogant to believe this god loves us or is looking out for us. How many awful things do we need to hear about and experience before we can conclude that the loving god doesn't exist. If a god is out there with the ability to do anything at all, I can conclude that this god is not kind. If it exists, it's surely neutral or evil. If god is neutral, then we have a name for it already; Nature. If it's evil, then we have no reason to praise it, celebrate it, worship it, or do anything we might imagine it wants of us unless we're to consider ourselves servile.

Why do we have to presume this force is “pulling the strings” or is “looking out for us”? That’s a church/religion thing. Certainly, as you’ve noted, there is enough evil in this world that could preclude that last notion - although there are philosophers who argue that by disputing that will bring up the concept of “free will” with others arguing further that the worst of humans is expressed due to our fear-based nature resulting from a lack of faith. In any case, should we decide to accept this force, if God exists (and just for the purpose of this discussion I will call it God) and is unknowable then that would also include It’s purpose being unknowable.

Further to that, if this force we can call God does exist, then it exists everywhere and has existed always. As Stephen Hawking once postulated his premise that time began with the Big Bang could support the idea of an infinite God that has always existed, exists now, and will always exist – even after the universe one day stops expanding and falls back into itself. I personally wonder if when this happens there will be another Big Bang and the whole thing will start all over again and on and on it goes like that. Boom! -> expand -> stop expanding -> fall back into itself -> Boom! -> expand -> stop expanding -> fall back into itself -> Boom! -> expand -> etc., etc. In any case, if something we can call God does exist there is no way to know what It’s role is in this as both It’s nature and purpose is unknowable.

If you read in order my last two posts on this page, you’ll see some ideas that could be consistent with your idea of a neutral God - one that you would call Nature - although I would go further to suggest we’re now referring to nature at a micro atomic and quantum level. This is the closet science has come to identifying an infinite universal force (call it Boris, call it God – I don’t care) that could be holding all of “this” together – “this” being not only an infinite universe but also an infinite number of universes. The other question you’ve alluded to is whether or not we would be able to achieve closer conscious contact, presumably through prayer and/or meditation, with this God and that gets a bit trickier to debate. However, the idea this act would have to be servile is just a notion of the church/religion. I’ve had my own experience with this, and I know I am far from alone, but my description of these experiences is not something I would choose to post or defend on a public forum.

[youjustcomplain]

Why do we have to presume this force is “pulling the strings” or is “looking out for us”? That’s a church/religion thing. Certainly, as you’ve noted, there is enough evil in this world that could preclude that last notion - although there are philosophers who argue that by disputing that will bring up the concept of “free will” with others arguing further that the worst of humans is expressed due to our fear-based nature resulting from a lack of faith. In any case, should we decide to accept this force, if God exists (and just for the purpose of this discussion I will call it God) and is unknowable then that would also include It’s purpose being unknowable.

Further to that, if this force we can call God does exist, then it exists everywhere and has existed always. As Stephen Hawking once postulated his premise that time began with the Big Bang could support the idea of an infinite God that has always existed, exists now, and will always exist – even after the universe one day stops expanding and falls back into itself. I personally wonder if when this happens there will be another Big Bang and the whole thing will start all over again and on and on it goes like that. Boom! -> expand -> stop expanding -> fall back into itself -> Boom! -> expand -> stop expanding -> fall back into itself -> Boom! -> expand -> etc., etc. In any case, if something we can call God does exist there is no way to know what It’s role is in this as both It’s nature and purpose is unknowable.

If you read in order my last two posts on this page, you’ll see some ideas that could be consistent with your idea of a neutral God - one that you would call Nature - although I would go further to suggest we’re now referring to nature at a micro atomic and quantum level. This is the closet science has come to identifying an infinite universal force (call it Boris, call it God – I don’t care) that could be holding all of “this” together – “this” being not only an infinite universe but also an infinite number of universes. The other question you’ve alluded to is whether or not we would be able to achieve closer conscious contact, presumably through prayer and/or meditation, with this God and that gets a bit trickier to debate. However, the idea this act would have to be servile is just a notion of the church/religion. I’ve had my own experience with this, and I know I am far from alone, but my description of these experiences is not something I would choose to post or defend on a public forum.

I appreciate your thoughtful comments. I'm an atheist, but not because I think there is no god, or am trying to use science to defend my position. I'm of the mind that I base my foundation of knowledge on everything on science and what my five senses can observe/detect and from what people in fields of science can discover.

The reason I mentioned a god pulling the strings is because there are plenty of people who believe that, just as there are plenty who think that god gives them favour at the cost of others, or that god this whole show started and is watching it unfold with us. Some people are just spiritual without any need for a god. I'm fine with all of it. But the god I see as being the least likely of all of the gods proposed over the years is the one that takes an active role in our lives has all the power to do as HE pleases and loves us so much that he inflicts awful things on us.

As for HIS motivation, his purpose, his wants and desires. I just don't see it. My senses aren't capable of detecting your thoughts and I can detect your presence, but I can't detect his motivations if I can't even find any reason to believe he exists or that he's male or that he hates a gay persons lifestyle, that he would have, himself, created.

I also find it quite challenging to separate religion from a god since religions are centered on telling people what god is, what he wants of them, what he expects of you, what you need to do and how and when. It's quite obvious that religion was made by man as a method of holding power over others, and in many cases, god is just the hook used to fool the masses, but not all.

Has god always been here? always? Well, Stephen Hawking may well have been right, and also may have been wrong. Since we can't know if god exists, and really, have no reason to believe he does or doesn't, the sensible place for everyone would be to be the fence-sitting agnostic; nobody KNOWS god exists. (if we agree he's unknowable). But as I said, I'm an atheist. I don't choose to make decisions purely on knowledge. I just have no reason to believe so my position is that I don't believe in a god. But I certainly would never say that I believe there is no god. One requires belief, the other requires a lack of, but atheist, or theist, we're all truly agnostics on the matter. Not only do we not know of a god, but we don't know what he wants of us if he exists, and since god is referred to as "he" almost exclusively, why? What reason would a god have for Gender or Sex?

[The Straken]

What reason would a god have for Gender or Sex?

The myth of god has been created for the most part by men and as such he gets a gender that is compatible with what they know.

[oldtrucker]

Though I agree, there is nothing we can know about God at present, that same fact is true about an infinite number of ideas.

<snip>

But if I'm to believe that there is a god somewhere out there pulling the strings, then why would I be so arrogant to believe this god loves us or is looking out for us. How many awful things do we need to hear about and experience before we can conclude that the loving god doesn't exist. If a god is out there with the ability to do anything at all, I can conclude that this god is not kind. If it exists, it's surely neutral or evil. If god is neutral, then we have a name for it already; Nature. If it's evil, then we have no reason to praise it, celebrate it, worship it, or do anything we might imagine it wants of us unless we're to consider ourselves servile.

Why do we have to presume this force is “pulling the strings” or is “looking out for us”? That’s a church/religion thing. Certainly, as you’ve noted, there is enough evil in this world that could preclude that last notion - although there are philosophers who argue that by disputing that will bring up the concept of “free will” with others arguing further that the worst of humans is expressed due to our fear-based nature resulting from a lack of faith. In any case, should we decide to accept this force, if God exists (and just for the purpose of this discussion I will call it God) and is unknowable then that would also include It’s purpose being unknowable.

Further to that, if this force we can call God does exist, then it exists everywhere and has existed always. As Stephen Hawking once postulated his premise that time began with the Big Bang could support the idea of an infinite God that has always existed, exists now, and will always exist – even after the universe one day stops expanding and falls back into itself. I personally wonder if when this happens there will be another Big Bang and the whole thing will start all over again and on and on it goes like that. Boom! -> expand -> stop expanding -> fall back into itself -> Boom! -> expand -> stop expanding -> fall back into itself -> Boom! -> expand -> etc., etc. In any case, if something we can call God does exist there is no way to know what It’s role is in this as both It’s nature and purpose is unknowable.

If you read in order my last two posts on this page, you’ll see some ideas that could be consistent with your idea of a neutral God - one that you would call Nature - although I would go further to suggest we’re now referring to nature at a micro atomic and quantum level. This is the closet science has come to identifying an infinite universal force (call it Boris, call it God – I don’t care) that could be holding all of “this” together – “this” being not only an infinite universe but also an infinite number of universes. The other question you’ve alluded to is whether or not we would be able to achieve closer conscious contact, presumably through prayer and/or meditation, with this God and that gets a bit trickier to debate. However, the idea this act would have to be servile is just a notion of the church/religion. I’ve had my own experience with this, and I know I am far from alone, but my description of these experiences is not something I would choose to post or defend on a public forum.

Kael... you've met Aya, haven't you?