Do we go nowhere ?

Avocado_Angel wrote: »

sarahbums wrote: »

yep. I think being dead is just....nothingness. The same as before we're born.

to me the point of life is just to try to leave the world a little better off than you found it. and that can mean something different for everyone.

But what's the point if we all disappear? Why would a dead person care if the world is better?

For their progeny?

God(s) and religion are constructs created by humans to abate the fear of death and keep control of the masses.

Most tenets of organized religion are so ridiculously illogical it’s pretty unbelievable to me how they have so many followers.

Sorry to hear about your brother. Life (DNA) is still a miracle regardless of a persons belief, and the wisdom and knowledge of every person worthy of preservation. Let your brother know that there are indeed people (you) who would miss him very much if he weren’t here. I hope he starts feeling better about his life soon.

I've had this conversation with family members a few times...

If you're doing "the right thing" simply for the reward (heaven), are you still doing the right thing?


And that's where said family members and I disagree. I was raised Catholic (went to Catholic school, was and alter boy, etc), and was fairly religious and pretty faithful through much of my childhood. I went to a Jesuit college and during my early adult years formed some of my own thoughts/opinions, and eventually left the church.

At this point in my life, I'm not sure where I stand regarding faith, but I have pretty much no use for religion. I believe you do the right thing because it's the right thing, not because you want some sort of reward for being "good".

TheRoadDog wrote: »

I believe in what I can see, touch and examine. God is a fabrication to try and explain the universe. That was acceptable thousands of years ago and helped create rules to live by and a morale standard. "Don't want to sin and be banished to hell."

Faith is not proof.

If you spend your time worshipping that which is non-existent, you have wasted time you could be spending with those you care about so you can ascend to a place that does not exist.

Before you crucify me, I just want to say, I have great respect for those that believe in any religious doctrine as long as they live by those standards. Hypocrites are the worst.

But surely there are things you can't see, touch, or examine that do exist, right? That is to say, the inability to see/touch/examine does not necessitate a lack of existence, does it? Surely there are things at the furthest reaches of the universe or at the deepest depth of the ocean that we can't see/examine... but does that mean they don't exist? New species of animals are still being discovered - does that mean they don't exist prior to discovery? Where do you draw the line between that which you don't know to exist and that which you know to not exist? I could say that's an issue of faith as well.

bojack3 wrote: »

jjpptt2 wrote: »

TheRoadDog wrote: »

I believe in what I can see, touch and examine. God is a fabrication to try and explain the universe. That was acceptable thousands of years ago and helped create rules to live by and a morale standard. "Don't want to sin and be banished to hell."

Faith is not proof.

If you spend your time worshipping that which is non-existent, you have wasted time you could be spending with those you care about so you can ascend to a place that does not exist.

Before you crucify me, I just want to say, I have great respect for those that believe in any religious doctrine as long as they live by those standards. Hypocrites are the worst.

But surely there are things you can't see, touch, or examine that do exist, right? That is to say, the inability to see/touch/examine does not necessitate a lack of existence, does it? Surely there are things at the furthest reaches of the universe or at the deepest depth of the ocean that we can't see/examine... but does that mean they don't exist? New species of animals are still being discovered - does that mean they don't exist prior to discovery? Where do you draw the line between that which you don't know to exist and that which you know to not exist? I could say that's an issue of faith as well.

It takes Pluto about 240 yrs to orbit the sun. There isnt anyway possible that a human would ever live long enough to see that entire orbit. However, I do believe the evidence provided by such things as science, math, and physics that the calculations of Pluto's orbit to be true. It's not a huge leap of faith to believe in something you will not see if there is data that raises the probability to a threshold of near fact. Its about about evidence. And yes new things can be discovered all the time, but that does not mean we should make stuff up about things before we do discover them. There may be unicorns and leprechauns, but until we have real evidence to substantiate that they really exist its just myth, and wanting it to be true doesnt make it any more so.

Well said, good point. Then take it a bit further.

Life on other planets? There's no evidence to prove there is, and I'm not aware of any evidence to suggest there likely is. One could say that given the vastness of space and the adaptability shown by life on earth, percentages alone would suggest there is life *somewhere* - but there isn't a scientific track record of life beyond earth to suggest it's likely.

What about UFOs? That might be the best parallel to a god that I can come up with quickly. People who believe they've seen a UFO believe as such because of their experience. Maybe people who believe in God do so because they feel they've experienced God in some way. To my knowledge, not all UFO sightings have been proven to be something man-made, have they? And going back to your point... we do have evidence to suggest space flight is possible...

SuperOrganism2 wrote: »

jjpptt2 wrote: »

denny_mac wrote: »

jjpptt2 wrote: »

And to be clear, I'm not arguing either way, either side. Believe what you want, don't believe what you don't want... just be thoughtful and intentional about it.

My point was simply that there is no evidence to prove, nor to disprove the existence of a god(s). So to believe takes a certain degree of faith. But to not believe also takes a certain degree of faith. Where you choose to draw the line and what side of the line you choose to stand on is entirely up to you.

Could you please expand on why you say it takes a certain degree of faith to not believe?

I can try, lol.

IMO, to not believe requires a certain degree of faith in mankind, and in the knowledge we have gained during our existence... that our inability to prove something is suggestive of its lack of existence more so than our inability to study/prove it.

The universe is billions of years old. Mankind is hundreds of thousands. Believing that we've got the universe pretty well figured out/understood in that relatively short period of time takes some faith in mankind. IMO.

Using "God" as an explanatory force kind of erases His importance.

Why is it raining?

damn you The Holy Ghost!

I'm going to need a few more breadcrumbs...