• We are a multilingual website again. Read the notice about this.
  • Understand AI use at MyPTSD: all AI use is explained in our AI help page. AI use is by choice here. It exists if you want it, but does nothing unless you choose to use it.

News The God Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.
Good people will do bad things, and bad people will do good things
And in the same vein, both sides have valid, and even compelling, arguments, as well as lapses in reasoning. Reading this thread I see good arguments and intelligent reasoning on both sides. (And much civility.)

The best minds in the history of the world have debated this issue and failed to get a clear and definitive answer. It remains open and will remain open, unresolved and a total mystery until the last person expires. It comes down to personal conviction / delusion / insanity / illumination / stubbornness - in fact, it boils down to half of Roget's Thesaurus. And I will continue to read this thread with interest.

Great thread @Muzikluvr! But, my money is still on Christianity.
 
faith belief do not make good people do bad things. Bad people do bad things because they chose to.
Religions across the planet are guilty of harboring deviant behavioral by it's members. That does not make the religion or the majority of its followers inherently Bad.
This is not what is implied by the original quote. We only have to look at the Inquisition and the Crusades to see how people who might have been essentially good might have been led by their belief system into doing things that were ... awful. And once again 'religion' must NOT be narrow-mindedly equated with Christianity (although I get that this thread focuses on Christianity).
 
Thank you for pointing out that I was in error on Christopher Hitchens, I was duped apparently by initial reports but after seeing your post went online and found an NPR interview from his wife that support what you say, no deathbed conversion. But the main thing about him, was that he did not think that religion was and "insult to human dignity". He thought it was a "first attempt" that was outmoded as a way to behave in society. He was a socialist for many years, then became a Marxist. I did not though put up the videos necessarily to support my personal view, but to show that contempt for faith based people is not necessary.

The other famous atheist I can think of who changed his mind was Anthony Flew who, though he did not convert to a religion Christian or otherwise, did ultimately pen There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind. However, in interviews he appeared to vacillate some and be inconsistent about whether or not he was a deist. The Wiki page is pretty concise about Flew, who was a scientist/philosopher, though he himself was particularly hostile to Islam. Wiki link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Flew

 
Thank you for posting evidence that people change their minds about the existence of god.

Speaking of changing one's mind, I have changed my mind about something I've been trying to sort out in this thread. I reread my posts, and shortly after Lionheart posted, I considered the possibility that spirituality and connection are the same thing. I've changed my mind about that...er... perhaps, I've made up my mind about that. I do not believe they are the same.

I had wondered about the feeling I got when considering one member's decision to leave this thread, upset that I had insulted his belief. I like that member. I've chatted with him elsewhere on the forum. I felt emotion, call it an emotional connection if you want... but the distinction is that HE didn't feel my emotional connection.

I couldn't have sent my emotional connection to him in any other way than verbally, as I did in the thread. Thinking of connection, in this way, led me to thinking of psychic powers. I watched a report where several psychics were brought in and tested. None passed. None could really feel a connection with their subjects that would relate information about them that wasn't spoken.

I do believe that my idea of our chemical make up, our DNA, our atoms, etc... having some kind of reaction to our environment and to each other is simply explained by our emotions. I have an emotional response to my environment and to other people, but it is contained within myself.
 
But, my money is still on Christianity.

By that do you mean that the world could unite under Christianity? What do you think our society will be like in 3014? Would our schools, governments, etc... be run on Christian policies?

My money is on secularism. God will be a private matter. People will make choices based on reason and information. People will move toward a more accepting society.
 
Last edited:
My money is on... no change. Why? Because no one belief system will fit everyone, thus there would always be minorities supporting another belief system, call it what you want, but that is being human.

I want to change my answer...
My motive to change my mind was based on pessimism. A pessimistic view of my fellow human being's ability to let go of the illusion of love and connection, in order to create a system where love is more fragile, perhaps, yet more real and more active - as opposed to prayer and the feeling of being loved by god - love would be communicating with people and receiving support in the form of a hug or a real solution to the problem. And, in this new system of love and connection, instead of praising god for providing someone who was willing and able to help you solve your problem, after you told them what it was, you'd thank them for it, and not take any portion away from them to give glory to an invisible Father. You'd feel connected to the helper, feel appreciation for them, and maybe think that you'd like to be there for them some day, if you can.

I wasn't a believer before the traumas began. I was too young, really, to take it all seriously. I had never taken any of it literally before. I would bet that there are Christians out there who continue to have just as casual an experience as my "normal" childhood experience with it. They don't "believe". In other words, they don't drink the Kool-aid, they wouldn't follow someone to the middle of nowhere to create a new Christian country. They enjoy church for the community, for the fellowship, for the philanthropy, for the family bonds, for the approval, and for the uplifting messages intermittently disbursed from the pulpit and in the Sunday School classes. That feeling of belonging, and caring about one another. They don't embrace the supernatural aspect when confronted with it, and they MAY suggest, condescendingly, that they think it's really important for Others to believe because it keeps them honest and nonviolent.

Religion is a tool which our society has outgrown. Our world has far too many powerfully destructive weapons for a faith based nation to have their hands on. It is time to create fellowship, philanthropy and family like bonds in a system that embraces logic and reasoning and rejects magic and supernatural intervention. Many of our family bonds are toxic, dysfunctional because they maintain many of the same magical thinking that occurs in churches. When confronted with evidence, our enabling family members often refuse to believe it... like they get to choose what is real and what isn't real... like they can just disbelieve something in order to keep it out of their lives... like that won't impact their future, nor mean a lifetime of traumas to the reporting victim. Victims and Enablers may pray for someone to help, but won't talk to anyone themselves.

In a society where our fellowship is fostered in a logical, reasoning system, we would have support systems which work to protect victims, rehabilitate abusers and isolate predators... because those people who confront issues head on, in a down to earth, solution based way, will find themselves leaders in this kind of social system. People will follow the problem solvers out of the darkness (kicking and screaming all the way, some of them; but others will catch on quickly to the approaches used by problem solvers to sort out disputes).

Let that "minority view" be the magical thinkers, the supernatural, fantasy, wishful thinking, abstract thinking people. Those people who THINK they can muddle reality with what they HOPE is true, by stating that their hope cannot be disproved and so it must be just as likely as what logic concludes given the evidence involved. Let the majority view become one of rational, logical, evidence based thinkers who understand that regardless of the possibility that there is a god... the main focus of their daily lives must be that the only solution to our problems here on earth must come from ourselves, and so our society may flourish as we value free thinking.
 
This is a great thread, one that deserves well thought out replies,....however I wanted to add something I heard someone say once to the question,

"What is God?" ....to which they answered,

"Everything if you believe and nothing if you don't!"

I think this much sums it up simply for me on the God debate, so anyways...

If God represents the best I can hope for, then I am a believer. If I am delusional then let it begin and end with me, as I do not wish to sway others in any direction, for or against. I just wanted to state what is true for me.

Thanks for giving me that opportunity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Donation drives

2026 Donation Goal

Goal
$1,800.00
Earned
$910.00
This donation drive ends in
0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
  50.6%

Trending content

Featured content

Back
Top Bottom