Do you believe in god?

[C1trus 4,341]

I believe in God. Just because some you don't believe in the Christian belief doesn't mean you can mock it like that.

In Christian perspective (which even I struggle to do), it is taught to deny yourself and follow Him. How could most of you even relate to that? Lol

[loathereality 26,409]

https://i2.wp.com/subtubes.com/img/mp3/pl_meghan2.gif

[Bebe 17,094]

2 hours ago, Trxstan said:

As a religious person (catholic and hunty (yes they can coexist)), I'll just place my 2 cents here about common misconceptions:

HERE WE GO 

1. all of scripture is true and some of it actually happened: this means that NOT EVERYTHING IS LITERAL. Adam and Eve is a story that was divinely inspired to address original sin (basically that we are constantly tempted by sin, despite our search for goodness and truth)

2. free will: we are not 'slaves' to a God. We FREELY CHOOSE to praise Him because we believe that He governs our world in some shape or form and that He represents all that is good. He isn't so obvious as to give you money when you ask for it. That would defeat the entire of purpose of being human (seeking betterment, trying to be the best version of yourself and sharing that with others). We also believe that makes you morally responsible for what you do wrong- God created you AND gave you free will, therefore you are responsible for your actions, not just God.

3. natural disasters: Catholics do believe the universe has a basis in science (that means that things happen for reasons governed by the laws of physics (if what we know is true)). GOD DOES NOT INTERVENE TO STOP CHANGE AND EVOLUTION. If God were to prevent everything bad and challenging from happening to us, we would get nowhere. We learn and grow from our mistakes and what we can interpret. Natural disasters bring us closer together as a PLANET. I am not advocating for natural disasters, but you have to understand, if we were to live in a perfect world as perfect beings, nothing would have importance. Why discover gravity when you can just sleep in your golden palace all day? See what I mean. God does not want us to worship Him out of necessity, but rather He wants us to seek knowledge and truth, and in turn we are seeking Him (we (catholics) believe that He is all that is good and not a physical person).

4. science: science is really great, but it cannot account for morality. We know that we have a soul and a conscience, and we believe that that exists in every person and THAT comes from God. Our bodies are made from other people, but our souls come from God. That is why we believe in heaven and hell: our souls rise up, but our bodies decay.

ok I may have just wasted a ton of my time, but hopefully you can pull something interesting from this. Please argue with me if you want we can have discourse it'll be fun .

Love! -Me

I wasn't going to quote you, but since you did put "please argue with me if you want we can have discourse it'll be fun" I'm happy to go back and forth so we can challenge each other

1. How would you describe 'Original Sin' though? What's your definition? How does it work? I know there are a few differing concepts of what Original Sin is, but the main issue I have with this idea of Original Sin is the idea of inherited guilt. It's pretty common practice within Catholicism to be baptised as an infant in order to cleanse them of the Original Sin. How is it just to be punished or condemned for the sins of those who came before? How is it fair to be branded sinful for the transgressions of the original man/men?

2. I think the major problem of 'Free Will' is the contradicting idea that God is also omniscient. If God knows everything then it follows that God knows every choice you will make, if God knows every choice you will make then your actions must be predetermined, if your actions are predetermined how can you have free will? I also wonder, if God knows the future why is He testing us? He already knows who is worthy of heaven, He knows who among us will live righteous lives, why force people through the pain and suffering of this world? Why not cut that part and allow those who He knows are good into heaven?

God is also omnipotent, He has the power to control you at any time - Can you ever really have true free will? Or does an omnipotent God only allow for an illusion of free will? If a slave owner allows their slave to do what they like, yet still holds them as legal property, does the slave really have free will? The master at anytime can override what the slave wants and force them back into labor. If God has the power to interfere at any point, surely you can't have free will. Every time you choose to do something, God has allowed it to happen. Every 'free' choice you have made has been allowed by God. The ultimate choice isn't really yours It's God's, because He is the one with the power to allow you to make certain choices or deny you the ability to make a certain choices.


3. Why does it require Hurricanes for humans to learn things? You say 'we learn and grow from our mistakes' but... Hurricanes, earthquakes, volcano eruptions aren't a result of some human mistake. These disasters naturally affect poor nations far more than wealthy nations with the resources to detect the incoming disaster, evacuate areas and provide aid to those affected. Why is it that the poor should be punished? Is such suffering really worth the 'lesson'? What lesson did we learn from the recent hurricanes? From the thousands displaced? The 150+ lives lost to Harvey and Irma? Was the suffering worth that lesson? Surely humanity has enough problems without the added problems of natural disasters beyond their control. 

4. Science doesn't claim to have any say in morality, it's not it's place. Questions concerning morality and ethics are better left with the philosophers, not the scientists. While there are many problems with the grounding of morality, I don't think God gives us a satisfying answer to that problem... If we believe God is the source of morality then are right actions right because God commands them? Or are right actions commanded by God because they are right?

If actions are only right because God commands them, it means morality is arbitrary... It means anything God says is automatically right. Imagine God came down from heaven tomorrow and told us that He has a new message for us and that He had been waiting until the world was truly ready to hear His message. Imagine He reveals that the ten commandments have now been reversed. You shall murder, you shall commit adultery, you shall dishonour your parents, you shall covet your neighbor's wife.

Suddenly that's all okay, because God commanded that it be so. Tomorrow we could be living in some ethical bizzaro world simply because God commanded it. Murder is totally fine because actions are only right because God commands them to be right and God has decided that Murder is right. God commands what is good simply becomes God commands what he commands - because whatever God commands becomes good.

If right actions are commanded by God because they are right... Well it means that morality has a grounding in something other than God... So why do we need him to figure out what is morally right and morally wrong? Furthermore it means that morality exists independently of God, God didn't create morality (something hard to swallow if you believe God created everything) and it means God is actually bound by moral codes of behaviour. If there are some standard of goodness that God has to stick to while making his commands then there must be things that God cannot command...

Either whatever God commands to be good is good and God can command anything OR morality exists independently of God and he is bound and restricted by some standard of goodness. I think either option presents some problems to any theist.

[rothach 0]

Personally, I do not believe in following or worshipping *a* singular higher power or a multitude of them. However I am uncertain as to if there is some form of higher power that could have potentially created us or that dictates our actions. I believe it to be ignorant to believe solely in science or one religion. I do not believe in the afterlife, I believe our organs eventually shut down and we take our last breathe before we ceast to exist. But who am I to state someone incorrect for believing otherwise? Compared to the universe we are so small. A cell underneath a microscope. We scarcely know a thing! There is much to be answered - much. So to summarise: there could be a higher power but who is to say that it is singular or humanoid and that if it existed/exists that we would be aware of *it*? This is why I disagree with claiming that your religious belief and the God that you follow and allow to dictate your life to some extent is the only higher power. The same does go for multiple higher powers. Please do not interpret that this is not me denying the potential distance of the higher power(s) you believe in! You have your right to that! To me there is simply other theories that include a range of bizarre and seemingly irrational beliefs that with the scarce knowledge we have leaves them unfalsifiable. Whilst science does account for a lot of what does happen in our world - on our Earth, that does not exclude these possibilities. 

 

NOTE: by not following or worshipping a higher power/higher powers, what I do mean is being **** about the rules and regulations some religions have to be abided by. For instance, very strict Catholics and Jahovas Witness. From what I see so much in my life and from other cultures I have studied and from the media too is that religion does not just regulate the followers lives but those individuals often want to - and have - stripped and denied certain groups of people their human rights. It has also been known to hinder the progression of science and medicine. NOT to generalise this to all Catholics and religious people. I am well aware that there are wonderful religious people who are accepting, kind and peaceful. 

 

That is a personal take on religion and whatnot. Remember: you do you. Be religious. Be atheist. Be agnostic. Just be respectful and tolerant of one another and do not try to dictate one another’s life based on your belief

[artElias 596]

I believe in god, but it's not a man for me, it's not a person, actually I define my own god

[Meruk Holland 2,277]

I voted yes, but my religion is a very gray area. In the simplest of terms, I believe in Apollo and Aphrodite. More specifically, I believe in the aspects and domains of Music, Love, Healing, Beauty, and... Wolves  Anyhow, I had grown up with the philosophy "Whatever it is you think about all the time, that is what you worship." I found there was a lot of cross-over between what I believed in and what Apollo and Aphrodite held domain over. So over time, I began to personify my religious beliefs as the gods of ancient Greece. In essence, the names of the gods are placeholders for metaphysical forces of nature that influence the world around us. If it storms, especially one with a lot of thunder, I'll curse Poseidon. On a beautiful, full moon night, I'll praise Artemis/Selene. I don't actually think there is such gods, but it feels good to acknowledge the forces in some way.

[ShockPop 7,747]

There would be no disbelief or belief if a god was so. It would just "be".

Belief in a higher power shows a number of things: blame passing, inability to think objectively, inability to investigate and gain knowledge, fear, a feeling of inferiority, the need to rely on a superior.

Do you believe in the invisible man? Why not?

[ARTPOP2 3,948]

I don't believe in "God" in the context of religion. But I am a deist and I believe in some kind of transcendant power (if it's called God or not) tha gouverns this world but like I don't believe in God as a character or person. 

[Trxstan 1,619]

10 hours ago, Bebe said:

I wasn't going to quote you, but since you did put "please argue with me if you want we can have discourse it'll be fun" I'm happy to go back and forth so we can challenge each other

1. How would you describe 'Original Sin' though? What's your definition? How does it work? I know there are a few differing concepts of what Original Sin is, but the main issue I have with this idea of Original Sin is the idea of inherited guilt. It's pretty common practice within Catholicism to be baptised as an infant in order to cleanse them of the Original Sin. How is it just to be punished or condemned for the sins of those who came before? How is it fair to be branded sinful for the transgressions of the original man/men?

2. I think the major problem of 'Free Will' is the contradicting idea that God is also omniscient. If God knows everything then it follows that God knows every choice you will make, if God knows every choice you will make then your actions must be predetermined, if your actions are predetermined how can you have free will? I also wonder, if God knows the future why is He testing us? He already knows who is worthy of heaven, He knows who among us will live righteous lives, why force people through the pain and suffering of this world? Why not cut that part and allow those who He knows are good into heaven?

God is also omnipotent, He has the power to control you at any time - Can you ever really have true free will? Or does an omnipotent God only allow for an illusion of free will? If a slave owner allows their slave to do what they like, yet still holds them as legal property, does the slave really have free will? The master at anytime can override what the slave wants and force them back into labor. If God has the power to interfere at any point, surely you can't have free will. Every time you choose to do something, God has allowed it to happen. Every 'free' choice you have made has been allowed by God. The ultimate choice isn't really yours It's God's, because He is the one with the power to allow you to make certain choices or deny you the ability to make a certain choices.


3. Why does it require Hurricanes for humans to learn things? You say 'we learn and grow from our mistakes' but... Hurricanes, earthquakes, volcano eruptions aren't a result of some human mistake. These disasters naturally affect poor nations far more than wealthy nations with the resources to detect the incoming disaster, evacuate areas and provide aid to those affected. Why is it that the poor should be punished? Is such suffering really worth the 'lesson'? What lesson did we learn from the recent hurricanes? From the thousands displaced? The 150+ lives lost to Harvey and Irma? Was the suffering worth that lesson? Surely humanity has enough problems without the added problems of natural disasters beyond their control. 

4. Science doesn't claim to have any say in morality, it's not it's place. Questions concerning morality and ethics are better left with the philosophers, not the scientists. While there are many problems with the grounding of morality, I don't think God gives us a satisfying answer to that problem... If we believe God is the source of morality then are right actions right because God commands them? Or are right actions commanded by God because they are right?

If actions are only right because God commands them, it means morality is arbitrary... It means anything God says is automatically right. Imagine God came down from heaven tomorrow and told us that He has a new message for us and that He had been waiting until the world was truly ready to hear His message. Imagine He reveals that the ten commandments have now been reversed. You shall murder, you shall commit adultery, you shall dishonour your parents, you shall covet your neighbor's wife.

Suddenly that's all okay, because God commanded that it be so. Tomorrow we could be living in some ethical bizzaro world simply because God commanded it. Murder is totally fine because actions are only right because God commands them to be right and God has decided that Murder is right. God commands what is good simply becomes God commands what he commands - because whatever God commands becomes good.

If right actions are commanded by God because they are right... Well it means that morality has a grounding in something other than God... So why do we need him to figure out what is morally right and morally wrong? Furthermore it means that morality exists independently of God, God didn't create morality (something hard to swallow if you believe God created everything) and it means God is actually bound by moral codes of behaviour. If there are some standard of goodness that God has to stick to while making his commands then there must be things that God cannot command...

Either whatever God commands to be good is good and God can command anything OR morality exists independently of God and he is bound and restricted by some standard of goodness. I think either option presents some problems to any theist.

Woo! a debate! (by the way, I'm not a theologian, I'm just interpreting stuff I've been learning in my religion classes so here we gOOO) (again).

1. Ok so from what I know, Original Sin essentially states that man (the physical/bodily component) is inherently flawed. We often commit sins (whether intentional or unintentional) because that's just how we are. It's not one specific act, rather, it's just how we are. Baptism absolves this 'state of being' and allows us to be closer to God. Baptism is a sacrament in which the parent gives the child the gift of absolution of this state of being, but we are still susceptible to acts of sin. Original sin isn't so much about 'justice' and 'fairness' as it is about morality. It's about our previous (and continual) failure to choose what's best for us and others, and our decision to stray from goodness and God and turn to sin and evil (no matter how serious the act). Our Original Sin is just as prominent today as it was back then. 

2. This is a very interesting point. The thing is, we, as humans, are only capable of a certain level of comprehension that is below God. To God, things that may seem complex (like time travel) are simplified. To God, time is not linear. It's not cause effect. Time exists in its own plane. It is a realm beyond our understanding. God sees the entire picture (all of history and all of the future), but to Him, it is all in the present (or so we call it). It's all happening at once. Free will is a gift. It allows us to freely chose to love God. God does not want to directly alter our identities. He acts as a guide that helps us become the best version of ourselves - not a completely different people. Our actions are not 'predetermined' to God, they have already happened and will happen in the future. What exists now has already existed and will continue to exist to God. God does not feel the need to intervene in our lives and take those who deserve to be in heaven because each person is granted free will and dignity. It would deny one's dignity if they were to be sucked into hell out of nowhere. We each deserve a chance and to live our lives to the fullest, based on your definition of what that is. Pain and suffering make us stronger- they are deciding factors that weed out the strong from the weak. That doesn't mean God should make life hell. It just means that pain makes joy that much more enjoyable and deserving. If a story was one straight line with no ups or downs, life would be pointless. (hopefully I answered all the parts of your questions. I kinda jumped around lol sorry )

God is not a micromanager. He does not try to control every aspect of our lives. We chose whether or not we let Him be a part of us. God wants us to be good. But he won't stop us from robbing a bank if we are really set on it. God has the power to intervene, but he won't (until the end time, but that's another story). He will judge us based on our actions because he is the creator of our souls. God doesn't 'allow' or 'deny.' Free will is a gift that God promises he will not directly stop or force us to do anything. If God were still actively forcing people to do certain things, there would be no crime, everyone would be catholic, etc. God does not seek to directly change our actions, but instead, inspire us to think differently. He doesn't have to come to us in a dream and tell us 'sin is bad.' He can work differently. We as humans have imaginations and the power to interpret. Maybe you'll look at a sunset and be reminded '[God/life/nature] is amazing.' It's through those little things that God tries to reach out to us to help us turn to goodness. God doesn't seek the bad in people. He seeks to bring out the good. 

3. Not all natural disasters are intended as lessons. They are not also God's direct acts. We could view them from many different points of view. First of, the reasons those countries are poor are not because of God's wrath, but because of human failure. Just look at Haiti. Haiti is poor because of its history of European colonization and segregation. The earthquake was an unfortunate event. Look at the Northridge earthquake. California was rather affluent and bounced back. It wasn't a punishment, so much as it was simply a natural event. Look at the Mexico earthquake. The humanitarian response has been tremendous. This is not God yelling at everyone to help, but people being inspired to help. Things beyond our control make living that much more interesting. If we had sovereignty over everything, nothing would be noteworthy because we'd just say 'oh I can do that. that isn't interesting.' It is through the things we can't control like nature and space, that we search for personal betterment and inspiration. Another view is that the poor aren't punished, but delivered to heaven. Their suffering is ended and they are risen unto heaven. It's all about how we view the situation. The deaths that occurred are really tragic, but death is natural. It was not God striking down people with lightning or targeting specific neighborhoods. Some of it was just bad luck, but a lot of it was natural selection. Those who did not listen to the warnings and leave and did not fortify their houses enough were those who suffered. 

4. So essentially, because this is such a contentious debate, the church believes that there are inherent 'truths' and definite 'goods' (like genuine acts of kindness) and 'bads' (like rape). But, there are also many different circumstances that mean different things. The church believes that their are three components that determine the morality of an act: object, circumstance, intention. Based on these three factors, God determines the the morality of an act. God is good, therefore good acts inherently seek God (if there is good intention and proper circumstance). Actions are just based one these inherent truths. In God's eyes, this is all objective, and not subjective to interpretation. It's a spectrum, not black and white.

Morality is not arbitrary. Moral relativism is a phenomenon that has been spreading and convinced many to believe that as long as you can justify something to yourself, then it is okay. That is not how it works. Based on object, circumstance, and intention, you can almost definitely determine good or bad. God's nature is not malleable to good or bad. He is pure good. He would not revert the 10 commandments. The hypothetical situation simply cannot happen. It's as if one were to say: 'what if we all just turned into jello? then what?' Because it simply will not happen. God doesn't command good. God IS good. He is goodness itself. He is love. I know it's kind of hard to wrap your head around, but that's just what we believe. 

God and goodness are incapable of being separated. They are one and the same. Morality is a uniquely human responsibility. We do not chastise a lion for eating an antelope. Morality is our interpretation of what is good and what is bad. Because God is good, he only seeks to bring about good. God would not command bad because he is good. It's like saying I could become a window whenever I want, even though I'm human. It's completely contradictory to my nature and so it simply cannot happen.

I like the way you think! Very interesting! Things I've never even considered before!  Love!!

[Plus 250]

Some kind of Superpower: Yes

That written God in books: No 

[Panchecco 17,634]

I'm probably going to offend somebody but religion is just the stupidest concept ever created by the human race

the fact alone that there are so many different religions in the world kinda proves that there can't be a "real" god no matter how many people believe in his/her/their existence

as I was growing up I realized men came up with religion just to have something/someone to comfort them when they wanted/needed to and to have someone to blame when something bad happens

[PeterPan 0]

Does Selegend count? JK

[ProdigyARTPOP 3,909]

@Trxstan I love your response, I’m catholic as well. Everything you said is accurate 

[PeterPan 0]

13 hours ago, Bebe said:

I wasn't going to quote you, but since you did put "please argue with me if you want we can have discourse it'll be fun" I'm happy to go back and forth so we can challenge each other

1. How would you describe 'Original Sin' though? What's your definition? How does it work? I know there are a few differing concepts of what Original Sin is, but the main issue I have with this idea of Original Sin is the idea of inherited guilt. It's pretty common practice within Catholicism to be baptised as an infant in order to cleanse them of the Original Sin. How is it just to be punished or condemned for the sins of those who came before? How is it fair to be branded sinful for the transgressions of the original man/men?

2. I think the major problem of 'Free Will' is the contradicting idea that God is also omniscient. If God knows everything then it follows that God knows every choice you will make, if God knows every choice you will make then your actions must be predetermined, if your actions are predetermined how can you have free will? I also wonder, if God knows the future why is He testing us? He already knows who is worthy of heaven, He knows who among us will live righteous lives, why force people through the pain and suffering of this world? Why not cut that part and allow those who He knows are good into heaven?

God is also omnipotent, He has the power to control you at any time - Can you ever really have true free will? Or does an omnipotent God only allow for an illusion of free will? If a slave owner allows their slave to do what they like, yet still holds them as legal property, does the slave really have free will? The master at anytime can override what the slave wants and force them back into labor. If God has the power to interfere at any point, surely you can't have free will. Every time you choose to do something, God has allowed it to happen. Every 'free' choice you have made has been allowed by God. The ultimate choice isn't really yours It's God's, because He is the one with the power to allow you to make certain choices or deny you the ability to make a certain choices.


3. Why does it require Hurricanes for humans to learn things? You say 'we learn and grow from our mistakes' but... Hurricanes, earthquakes, volcano eruptions aren't a result of some human mistake. These disasters naturally affect poor nations far more than wealthy nations with the resources to detect the incoming disaster, evacuate areas and provide aid to those affected. Why is it that the poor should be punished? Is such suffering really worth the 'lesson'? What lesson did we learn from the recent hurricanes? From the thousands displaced? The 150+ lives lost to Harvey and Irma? Was the suffering worth that lesson? Surely humanity has enough problems without the added problems of natural disasters beyond their control. 

4. Science doesn't claim to have any say in morality, it's not it's place. Questions concerning morality and ethics are better left with the philosophers, not the scientists. While there are many problems with the grounding of morality, I don't think God gives us a satisfying answer to that problem... If we believe God is the source of morality then are right actions right because God commands them? Or are right actions commanded by God because they are right?

If actions are only right because God commands them, it means morality is arbitrary... It means anything God says is automatically right. Imagine God came down from heaven tomorrow and told us that He has a new message for us and that He had been waiting until the world was truly ready to hear His message. Imagine He reveals that the ten commandments have now been reversed. You shall murder, you shall commit adultery, you shall dishonour your parents, you shall covet your neighbor's wife.

Suddenly that's all okay, because God commanded that it be so. Tomorrow we could be living in some ethical bizzaro world simply because God commanded it. Murder is totally fine because actions are only right because God commands them to be right and God has decided that Murder is right. God commands what is good simply becomes God commands what he commands - because whatever God commands becomes good.

If right actions are commanded by God because they are right... Well it means that morality has a grounding in something other than God... So why do we need him to figure out what is morally right and morally wrong? Furthermore it means that morality exists independently of God, God didn't create morality (something hard to swallow if you believe God created everything) and it means God is actually bound by moral codes of behaviour. If there are some standard of goodness that God has to stick to while making his commands then there must be things that God cannot command...

Either whatever God commands to be good is good and God can command anything OR morality exists independently of God and he is bound and restricted by some standard of goodness. I think either option presents some problems to any theist.

Most of the commandments  are just common sense lol.   Like thou shall not kill, well duh.  

[Trxstan 1,619]

32 minutes ago, ProdigyARTPOP said:

@Trxstan I love your response, I’m catholic as well. Everything you said is accurate 

Woo! Religion is sexy! ily girl!!