Jump to content
Trurl

Questions to Ask

Recommended Posts

Think for a minute. Don’t think religion or science. Think belief. There is a difference between belief and religion.

 

Do you believe there are other worlds? Not just in space planets but other dimensions such as string theory.

 

Now you must decide if these worlds automatically exist or they were created.

 

If the worlds were created, you must decide if the creator actually cares about the human race.

 

If you do believe in a God that cares, you must decide if those teaching about him actually represent him.

 

If you believe God doesn’t exist, you must question the meaning of life.

 

I tried to remain unbiased here. But to me these are the questions I ask. Michio Kaku is correct in saying we can’t prove or disprove God. They only reason to argue is to try to influence someone’s beliefs. The arguing isn’t fighting. Debates can be fun.

 

These questions are personal, and I don’t try and force my answers on you. The entire idea behind a religion is to believe in those answers that make sense to a person’s own experiences.

 

I will say this. We don’t know of things we don’t know. I mean in science we find something new and don’t know much about it. It makes you question if it were there the whole time and how we could have not known about it before. Simply put, just because we haven’t experienced something, does not mean that a whole new world does not exist. Keep this in mind when you answer these questions.

 

BTW, I do not claim these questions are original. I have studied many sources. I think Michio Kaku explained the question of who is right best when he was ask about religion. He has several Youtube videos. These are just the questions I feel I have been asking myself. It adds fun to the debate, instead of simply yelling because you agree or disagree. As far as I know no one has asked these questions on SFN before. That is, at least without open-ended questions.

 

I'm sure we have all ask some of these questions before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the creator assertion is valid, who then created the creator?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if I ‘believe’ in other worlds.

I ‘believe ‘ in the universe. I ‘believe’ it created itself and that is an ongoing process. I don’t ‘believe’ it has a plan, or feelings.

About the meaning of life - I prefer to stay away from that rabbit hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/2/2019 at 8:15 PM, Trurl said:

Think for a minute. Don’t think religion or science. Think belief. There is a difference between belief and religion.

I think you need parameters for the differing types of "belief". We all have belief systems that let us take on knowledge at varying levels of importance and credibility. 

The divisions I personally make wrt belief are faith, hope, and trust. Faith asks for belief without reason, hope is wishful thinking, and trust is belief based on testable, predictable facts and reasoning. With these parameters, you can more easily assess the levels of what you believe.

On 8/2/2019 at 8:15 PM, Trurl said:

Do you believe there are other worlds? Not just in space planets but other dimensions such as string theory.

I hope there are. There's no real evidence to trust, and I don't blindly believe higher dimensions exist. I can hope and hold out for more evidence without making extreme assertions or changing my life.

On 8/2/2019 at 8:15 PM, Trurl said:

Now you must decide if these worlds automatically exist or they were created.

Why? From information I can trust I believe any higher dimension that currently exists are simply part of the geometry of the universe. 

On 8/2/2019 at 8:15 PM, Trurl said:

If you believe God doesn’t exist, you must question the meaning of life.

I don't see why. Must life have a meaning beyond what I personally invest in it? 

What is the meaning of life with god(s) in it? Guess which deity is the right one, then worship them to show you have utmost faith, and appease them for a few decades in order to achieve eternal paradise?

And what about weak atheism? I don't believe god(s) exist, but I don't claim they don't either. I trust that since they aren't observable, they hold no importance for me. I treat religion the same way I treat stamp collecting. If a stamp comes along that shows me I've been wrong, I'm willing to be persuaded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well these are not directly Christian questions. They are (or were) what I question about life. You are right about the meaning of life opening a can of worms. My beliefs now is that the meaning of life is as debatable as proving a creator exists. I believe we make our own meaning.

My goal was to share some questions. The intent was to see what others questioned. It can be religious or scientific. I know many questions have been ask since the beginning of humanity. However, I don't know with conflicting personal views if we are asking the same questions or just a result of life experiences.

Many religions tell to share the faith. But we know arguing if God exists is exhausting and usually pointless. You have to respect people have their own beliefs. But are the asking the same questions? What do they value?

Arguing seldom helps. On this forum the goal is debate so we can discuss the arguments. But it is the questions we ask or don't ask are the foundation of all our beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2019 at 3:15 AM, Trurl said:

Michio Kaku is correct in saying we can’t prove or disprove God

There are those who say you can disprove god.

for example, different religions throughout history have been based upon revelations from a god or gods,  however the revelations and the religions that stem from them seldom have much in common with one another.  If this god had been real then we might see cases where the god was consistently saying the same things to these people regardless of their place in history or geography, but that isn't what we see.

 

 

Edited by boo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2019 at 3:15 AM, Trurl said:

Do you believe there are other worlds? Not just in space planets but other dimensions such as string theory.

Well, there are obviously other worlds/planets in space, because we can see them.

"Planets in other dimensions" doesn't;t really mean anything.

What does this have to do with beliefs?

On 8/3/2019 at 3:15 AM, Trurl said:

Now you must decide if these worlds automatically exist or they were created.

What does "automatically exist" mean?

The other planets exist for the same reason the ones in our solar system do. Physics.

On 8/3/2019 at 3:15 AM, Trurl said:

If you believe God doesn’t exist, you must question the meaning of life.

Why?

That makes as much sense as saying: If you believe in garden gnomes then you must question the colour of custard.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, boo said:
2 hours ago, boo said:

There are those who say you can disprove god.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, boo said:

There are those who say you can disprove god.

 

Who exactly are we talking about that says that.

2 hours ago, boo said:

If this god had been real then we might see cases where the god was consistently saying the same things to these people regardless of their place in history or geography, but that isn't what we see.

How does that prove there is no God? Maybe that is proof that Gods always acts uniquely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, boo said:

There are those who say you can disprove god.

for example, different religions throughout history have been based upon revelations from a god or gods,  however the revelations and the religions that stem from them seldom have much in common with one another.  If this god had been real then we might see cases where the god was consistently saying the same things to these people regardless of their place in history or geography, but that isn't what we see.

God does not have communicate the same or consistent message, you just think he should.

Edited by Bufofrog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Who exactly are we talking about that says that.

How does that prove there is no God? Maybe that is proof that Gods always acts uniquely.

Dr Richard carrier has made that point.

Quote

How does that prove there is no God? Maybe that is proof that Gods always acts uniquely.

perhaps absolute proof is not obtainable, you can only work with probability,  it weakens the case for each of those gods considerably.

5 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

God does not have communicate the same or consistent message, you just think he should.

It would help if he did

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, boo said:

perhaps absolute proof is not obtainable, you can only work with probability,  it weakens the case for each of those gods considerably.

 

How does it weaken the case for them? What makes you believe Gods would provide a consistent message across place and time?

21 minutes ago, boo said:

Dr Richard carrier has made that point.

 

Would you mind providing a link? Primarily what I find is his doubt that Jesus really existed. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, zapatos said:
 

How does it weaken the case for them? What makes you believe Gods would provide a consistent message across place and time?

you are missing the point.

the god may or may not want to provide a consistent message, but if they did, it would make for very strong evidence of their existence. The fact that they don't, places the probability for their existence, far lower than the probability that a given individual who claims to have been visited by a god  is hallucinating.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, boo said:

you are missing the point.

the god may or may not want to provide a consistent message, but if they did, it would make for very strong evidence of their existence. The fact that they don't, places the probability for their existence, far lower than the probability that a given individual who claims to have been visited by a god  is hallucinating.

 

I guess I don't see any of the messages, consistent or not, providing any amount of validity to the existence of God.

To suggest that a consistent story told by people increases the likelihood of God, means that you accept that those stories may be derived from God or his communication with those people who tell their story. I do not accept that premise. All messages we hear from people appear to me to be coming from people, not God. A consistent message only tells me that those people began with a similar background.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, zapatos said:

. All messages we hear from people appear to me to be coming from people, not God. A consistent message only tells me that those people began with a similar background.

exactly.  arguably what you see is  exactly what you would expect to see if they were hallucinating, making it up etc.

38 minutes ago, zapatos said:
Would you mind providing a link? Primarily what I find is his doubt that Jesus really existed. Thanks.

I will look for it

1 hour ago, zapatos said:
Would you mind providing a link? Primarily what I find is his doubt that Jesus really existed. Thanks.

here  at  8:11  he makes the point.    

yes it is assuming that the god cares what we think and wants us to follow him etc. but that is what the claim generally is.

Edited by boo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2019 at 4:15 AM, Trurl said:

Do you believe there are other worlds? Not just in space planets but other dimensions such as string theory.

There are different meanings of 'belief':

- postponing certainty, as one was not yet in the position to find out if something is true, but it is knowledgeable: e.g. 'I believe somebody is eavesdropping behind the door.' I can check it by opening the door and look.

- metaphysical believes: things that are principally not accessible for our knowledge

Today most (reasonable) people consider belief in God as belonging to the second category.

On 8/3/2019 at 4:15 AM, Trurl said:

Now you must decide if these worlds automatically exist or they were created.

That already doesn't follow then. At this moment I would say we do not know to which category of belief the origin of the universe belongs too. We know the big bang is not the final answer, but if we ever can 'look' before the big bang I have no idea. But I think it is perfectly ok to leave the question as a question, and just see and wait if science can come with a further answer. Just posing a 'belief' in the second sense seems unnecessary to me. I would say that questions that cannot be answered should not be answered, accept with 'we do not know' and maybe we will never'.

On 8/3/2019 at 4:15 AM, Trurl said:

If you believe God doesn’t exist, you must question the meaning of life.

Not at all. The question should arise in everybody, if he believes in God or not. Dogmatic belief in God mostly includes an unreflected answer to the question of the meaning of life.

10 hours ago, zapatos said:

I guess I don't see any of the messages, consistent or not, providing any amount of validity to the existence of God.

Hmmm. I would say that inconsistent beliefs about God (or gods), together with 'belief' in the second sense above, makes it more probable that none of these beliefs really say something about our universe and therefore of God (gods).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im not too sure i can see what this thread is about. the construct  of 'belief' or the meaning of life/god. but my 2 bobs worth on both

it probably doesnt make sense, but me personally i dont like the word 'believe'. it annoys me. i dont understand its function.

i dont want to 'believe' something. anything. i would prefer to remain neutral until evidence comes along.

when we as humans 'believe' something, and the evidence comes along that our belief was incorrect, we are actually more likely to believe it. this has been shown by numerous studies. so im of the frame of mind to try to remove the human error part. the belief. and just wait until evidence presents itself either way.

 

who knows if there is a god or not. we cant prove it either way. we can be quite sure though that if there is a god, he has not contacted us as the religious teachings we have in the world today are easliy disprovable. 

so if god is real, then the meaning of life is to be the butt of cruel god jokes. as there is no evidence that he is anything but cruel.

if there is no god, then there is no meaning apart from what we make ourselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jfoldbar said:

it probably doesnt make sense, but me personally i dont like the word 'believe'. it annoys me. i dont understand its function.

i dont want to 'believe' something. anything. i would prefer to remain neutral until evidence comes along.

I sort of understand where you're coming from, but you're taking a fairly strict interpretation of "belief" as faith or wishful thinking. To me, if you believe something, it just means you generally take it as true. It's how you arrived at that belief that's important. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.