Do You Believe In God?

[spacelaser]

So there is no difference between knowing something doesn't exist vs. knowing its impossible to know whether something does or doesn't exist?

 

[Lacius]

So there is no difference between knowing something doesn't exist vs. knowing its impossible to know whether something does or doesn't exist?

There is of course a difference between knowing X doesn't exist, and knowing it's impossible to know whether or not X exists. The former would be gnostic, and the latter would be agnostic.

 

[gnmmarechal]

I don't believe in the existence of the biblic god, I absolutely do not.

I can't say if God exists though. I have no proof to back up his existence/nonexistence .

Which is why I'm a strong agnostic rather than atheist.

One thing I'll say though - I find the biblic God nonsensical, and absolute bullshit. For most religions.
If anything, God is a being that does not care for us at all, assuming God exists. And, I can't blame that hypothetical God for it, can I? We'd be but ants at its eyes.


Finally - If I had to take a guess, gamble, etc. I'd bet no, God does not exist.

 

[Lacius]

I don't believe in the existence of the biblic god, I absolutely do not.

I can't say if God exists though. I have no proof to back up his existence/nonexistence .

Which is why I'm agnostic rather than atheist.

One thing I'll say though - I find the biblic God nonsensical, and absolute bullshit. For most religions.
If anything, God is a being that does not care for us at all, assuming God exists. And, I can't blame that hypothetical God for it, can I? We'd be but ants at its eyes.


Finally - If I had to take a guess, gamble, etc. I'd bet no, God does not exist.

You should see my post at the top of the page regarding atheism vs. agnosticism.

 

[gnmmarechal]

You should see my post at the top of the page regarding atheism vs. agnosticism.

"Agnosticism is of the essence of science, whether ancient or modern. It simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe. Consequently Agnosticism puts aside not only the greater part of popular theology, but also the greater part of anti-theology. On the whole, the "bosh" of heterodoxy is more offensive to me than that of orthodoxy, because heterodoxy professes to be guided by reason and science, and orthodoxy does not.[13]"

— Thomas Henry Huxley

Generally, atheists do not believe in God. I, can't say I do not believe in God. Nor can I say I believe in it.

As far as my understanding goes, there are three options when faced with the question "Do you believe in God?". "Yes", "No", and "I don't know/I can't answer that question".

I don't know if I believe in God, but I don't know if I don't, and I can't answer it.

 

[Lacius]

"Agnosticism is of the essence of science, whether ancient or modern. It simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe. Consequently Agnosticism puts aside not only the greater part of popular theology, but also the greater part of anti-theology. On the whole, the "bosh" of heterodoxy is more offensive to me than that of orthodoxy, because heterodoxy professes to be guided by reason and science, and orthodoxy does not.[13]"

— Thomas Henry Huxley

Generally, atheists do not believe in God. I, can't say I do not believe in God. Nor can I say I believe in it.

As far as my understanding goes, there are three options when faced with the question "Do you believe in God?". "Yes", "No", and "I don't know/I can't answer that question".

I don't know if I believe in God, but I don't know if I don't, and I can't answer it.

If you had read my post, you would have seen the part about how dichotomies work. To believe or not-believe are the only two options regarding the question of belief. A failure to accept a claim as true is failure to accept a claim as true, by definition.

 

[gnmmarechal]

If you had read my post, you would have seen the part about how dichotomies work. To believe or not-believe are the only two options regarding the question of belief. A failure to accept a claim as true is failure to accept a claim as true, by definition.

Still, I refuse to answer "No" to a question I can't answer. I don't "not-believe", but I don't "believe" either. I simply stop. Let's say my brain throws an exception. I can't fully understand the question. I stop. I don't "not-believe". I don't "believe". Fuck. You're making my brain try to find an answer for the question, and it's too much for it to handle. x.x



































Essentially: Fuck this shit, the more I think about it, the more my head hurts.



Honestly, if you only give me those two options, and I absolutely have to answer, or you'll kill me, I'd probably kill myself so I don't have to choose.

 

[Lacius]

I don't "not-believe", but I don't "believe" either.

I will let the contradiction in this statement speak for itself.

 

[gnmmarechal]

I will let the contradiction in this statement speak for itself.

I'm aware of that. In regards to this matter, I contradict myself, and I won't change it. No matter how stupid it may sound or be.

 

[GhostLatte]

Aliens
Or we started from a "make your own bacteria kit"

Where did God come from? He just popped out of nowhere?

 

[Justinde75]

Where did God come from? He just popped out of nowhere?

He didn't come from anywhere, since he doesn't exist.

 

[gnmmarechal]

He didn't come from anywhere, since he doesn't exist.

Prove it.

 

[WilliamLC]

I don't believe in "God", at least not in the traditional sense. I believe that there are many greater powers out there, some of which might even take some interest in our little wet rock. However, the way many people see god, as a loving being who created us and genuinely cares for us, just simply cannot be true to me. So many atrocities have been allowed to happen throughout history that I don't think such a being would allow. So, the way I see it, the "gods" either simply do not care/have no interest in us or use us as a form of entertainment, like one big global reality show. Either way, they sure as heck aren't doing us any favors.

 

[Justinde75]

Prove it.

Prove that he exists

 

[gnmmarechal]

Prove that he exists

I cannot, just as you cannot. Saying "I believe God does not exist is one thing", it is giving your opinion/belief on the matter. Saying "God does not exist" is something you cannot say, as it is not backed up by any facts.


I personally do not know if there is any god, but - without doubt, you cannot say "god exists" or "god does not exist".

 

[mashers]

@chaoskagami and @Lacius

I believe there is a big difference between 'believing that something definitely does not exist' and 'not knowing whether you believe it exists or not'. One means 'no', and the other means 'I don't know'. Consider a more factual situation: without using a calculator or working it out by hand, tell me if the square root of 15,544,104,976 is 124,676. If you don't know already what the answer is, then you'll have to answer 'I don't know'. You're not telling me that it isn't, but that you don't have sufficient knowledge to tell me one way or another.

 

[chaoskagami]

The crux of my point is that Agnosticsm is answering 'I don't care' or 'insufficent data' to the question because there's no way to make a conclusion for true or false. You don't make an incomplete argument for or against and say 'agree with me'. That's like trying to say 'I know X+Y*Z is 5' when X, Y, and Z aren't defined.

And that's not even getting into the nature of whatever this so-called being is if it does exist.

 

[mashers]

The crux of my point is that Agnosticsm is answering 'I don't care' or 'insufficent data' to the question because there's no way to make a conclusion for true or false. You don't make an incomplete argument for or against and say 'agree with me'. That's like trying to say 'I know X+Y*Z is 5' when X, Y, and Z aren't defined.

Actually I think saying whether or not god exists is more akin to saying 'I know X+Y*Z is 5' when X, Y, and Z aren't defined'; a 'yes' or 'no' answer implies that you have some evidence one way or another and use that to come to your answer. An agnostic answer to that question would be, 'I don't know the result of X+Y*Z because I don't know the values of X+Y*Z, and unless someone proves to me what their values are then I can never know the result of that equation'.

 

[chaoskagami]

Actually I think saying whether or not god exists is more akin to saying 'I know X+Y*Z is 5' when X, Y, and Z aren't defined'; a 'yes' or 'no' answer implies that you have some evidence one way or another and use that to come to your answer. An agnostic answer to that question would be, 'I don't know the result of X+Y*Z because I don't know the values of X+Y*Z, and unless someone proves to me what their values are then I can never know the result of that equation'.

You explained it perfectly, thanks for correcting. That's what I meant.

It's kind of like a mental segfault. There's not enough evidence one way or another to come to a conclusion for or against the concept.

t might be more accurate to say we don't even know the equation to solve for.

 

[gnmmarechal]

It's kind of like a mental segfault.

Let's say my brain throws an exception.

It was pretty much what I meant lol