[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by rvikz: *
do we really fight over god or ultimatly fight for land in the name of god?
[/QUOTE]
Good question, but possibly another thread could be started on the "misuse" of religion/god for ulterior purposes.
"Why do those who believe, believe?"
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by chandigarh: *
:) C'mon. The very fact that you are basing your argument on a negation of the original argument (beating me wth my own schtick, eh?)
invalidates stating of above hypothesis.
Its like saying. You cannot disprove existance of pink elephants, QED.
[/QUOTE]
Its also like saying: you cannot disprove the existence of regular elephants.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
actually, my reasons arent historical or social.
i was arguing from a scientific perspective.
given that you have no scientific reasoning to offer, it does become a subjective matter, a personal matter of opinion.
[/QUOTE]
Oh you are still here.
Yes, it is a matter of opinion, and that is what I'm asking. If you have that opinion, ehan why do you have it?
I'm not here to offer scientific reason for my belief. (BTW, skeptisism,or to question unproven hypothesis is scientific enough for me)
Science does not pander to blind faith. And I concur.
But, "Why do those who believe, believe?"
I'm still not getting any real answers to that question.(yet ;))
Chd
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
Its also like saying: you cannot disprove the existence of regular elephants.
[/QUOTE]
eh?
Or, I CAN prove the existance of regular ones. All I need is one old hathi to prove my point! And so far no proof no where of any of our hypotheses anywhere (which to me does not matter atall, as explained)
ok dude, you post on...
Gotta go, will be back some time later
the only reason i came with guns blazing into this thread was that there was yet again, someone trying to cite science, and 'this day and age' as a reason for obviating God.
[QUOTE]
(BTW, skeptisism,or to question unproven hypothesis is scientific enough for me)
[/QUOTE]
i do not have a scientific basis for my beliefs, nor did i arrive at them through science. however, believing what i do believe is not contrary to science either. asserting that it is, is.
i have no beef with you trying to find out why people believe in God. if i am ever in that frame of mind, where i can reduce everything in my life that leads me to believe what I do into typed words, i will answer your question.
for now, suffice to say, i have read notes from the underground. i've read crime and punishment..the brothers karamazov..the idiot. i live in the same world you do. i doubt you could explain why even when you read what i read, you lived where i lived..you arrived at what you believed. atleast not at 437am.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by chandigarh: *
eh?
Or, I CAN prove the existance of regular ones. All I need is one old hathi to prove my point! And so far no proof no where of any of our hypotheses anywhere (which to me does not matter atall, as explained)
[/QUOTE]
im sorry. i meant to say its like saying you cant prove the existence of regular elephants had neither of us seen them.
the difference between your statement and mine is that both of us believe pink elephants dont exist in the former, and in the latter both of us do believe regular ones exist.
just goes to show how futile the whole hypothesis approach is. it only allows you to converge to the belief you already have.
Mr. Chandigarh,
Somebody has said it very beautifuly about the life brought to existence by an accident:
[QUOTE]
The probability of life originating from an accident is comparable to the probability of Unabridged Dictionary resulting from an explosion in the print factory
[/QUOTE]
And Sir Fred Hoyle: Author of The black cloud wrote
[QUOTE]
The spontaneous formation by ‘chance’ of a working enzyme is like a hurricane blowing through a junkyard and spontaneously putting together a Boeing 747
[/QUOTE]
So the Question, who created that enzyme? Some of them who believe in that creator call him Allah!
Mr. Chandigarh,
Lets say In crossing a heath, suppose I pitch my foot against a stone, and were asked how the stone came to be there; I might possibly answer, that, for anything I knew to the contrary, it had lain there for ever.
But suppose I found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place; I should hardly think of the answer that I gave before.
For anything I knew to the contrary, it had lain there for ever.
Watch has several parts put together for a purpose
•They are formed and adjusted to create motion
•The motion is regulated to point to the hour
•If you changed the order function will cease •All parts tending to the same result
The inference is inevitable that there must have existed at some time and at some place a maker of the watch, Who comprehended its construction and designed its use.
If the watch is self repairing and regenerating, then we have to consider that:
•It comes with a watchman who keeps fixing it
•It has a built in factory that creates new watches
•It only increases the marvel, does not remove it
well done, * fateh*..
theres been some pretty good posts in this thread.
although.
times when my belief is in limbo, i have found myself unconvinced that anyone's arguments, for or against, could sway my feelings either way.
i have been part of too many arguments. i have lost many i shouldnt have, in retrospect. i have silenced others in many where i was wrong.
i can no longer walk away from a debate thinking that my opposition, or I, said whatever that could be said. i can no longer walk away thinking my conclusions are final.
and yet, any belief you could acquire through reason is necessarily from a process of weighing of ideas,experiences against each other, as if you were debating with yourself. how do you know either camp hasnt missed something? how do you know your lack of experience, knowledge didnt lead you to false conclusions?
can you really reason yourself into believing? if you're basing your conclusions on what you know, arent you assuming too much on your knowledge?
Chandigarh
I once had a dialogue with an aethiest and posted some of my arguments and counter arguments on this topic. I've also given a number of factual flaws to Darwins Theory which has made it impossible to be a reality. Once I dig it up I'll repost again.
However, in answer to your query, of why does one believe? The answer is very simple. CHOICE. We choose to believe or not to believe. Everyone ponders over Creation and then makes that decision to Believe in what they feel comfortable with. Even you believe. Not the same as us, but you still believe that their is no God based on your pondering.
Some Faiths are incompatable with Science but for us, Islam is very compatable with Science. I'm not going to elaborate further for the time being, as it is much easier for me to repost my previous views on these subjects.
sholay.
i've had arguments with athiests where i was the one with the weaker points. what does that mean?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
the only reason i came with guns blazing into this thread was that there was yet again, someone trying to cite science, and 'this day and age' as a reason for obviating God.
[/QUOTE]
Understood. Maybe I did not need to qualify my 1st post with what I personally think. The day and age reasoning was meant to reflect the lack of movement on such theological issues while there have been quantum jumps in knowledge on all other fronts in the last 500 years.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
i do not have a scientific basis for my beliefs, nor did i arrive at them through science. however, believing what i do believe is not contrary to science either. asserting that it is, is.
i have no beef with you trying to find out why people believe in God. if i am ever in that frame of mind, where i can reduce everything in my life that leads me to believe what I do into typed words, i will answer your question.
for now, suffice to say, i have read notes from the underground. i've read crime and punishment..the brothers karamazov..the idiot. i live in the same world you do. i doubt you could explain why even when you read what i read, you lived where i lived..you arrived at what you believed. atleast not at 4:37am.
[/QUOTE]
Would love to read what you do think.
OT: Ok, you must have read "Heart of Darkness" by Conrad too. Recall a line in which he says (i'm paraphrasing here) " There are the devils of sex, greed and bloodlust, but the devil that took me was the devil of folly" Makes a lot of sense if you read it after reading the underground.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
just goes to show how futile the whole hypothesis approach is. it only allows you to converge to the belief you already have
[/QUOTE]
No mate, I disagree with you. The hypothesis approach holds more water than that appers right now as all we are doing is using standard debating tricks to get our point across.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by fatehahmed: *
So the Question, who created that enzyme? Some of them who believe in that creator call him Allah!
[/QUOTE]
I know that, but the question remains, why do these "some-people" believe ?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
can you really reason yourself into believing? if you're basing your conclusions on what you know, arent you assuming too much on your knowledge?
[/QUOTE]
Catch-22. Like our initial "hypothesis" debate. And for all that matters, the answer to the above doesn't (as long as you realise the limitations of your own assertions).
Gotta love this catch, Catch-22 :)
Sholay:
Ok, lets have those reposts mate. (Don't forget Darwin too)
I have a problem with your "CHOICE" argument though.
[QUOTE]
However, in answer to your query, of why does one believe? The answer is very simple. CHOICE. We choose to believe or not to believe. Everyone ponders over Creation and then makes that decision to Believe in what they feel comfortable with. Even you believe. Not the same as us, but you still believe that their is no God based on your pondering.
[/QUOTE]
Fallacious argument really (imho). Please reread what you have said.
The only part that does make sense is that people believe (or not) as to what they are comfortable with.
Acceptable reason, but one I personally do not like. Its like a government/authority saying "Ignorance is Bliss" as people would rather be blissful than vexed.
OK, if anyone has actually read all this stuff. the question is:
"Why do those who believe, believe?"
Please try to answer that (questioning my beliefs is secondary)
Chd
Mr. Chandigarh,
You wrote:
[QUOTE]
The only part that does make sense is that people believe (or not) as to what they are comfortable with.
[/QUOTE]
Its not the matter of being comfortable or not! There is only one truth out there and that is the absolute truth that humans beings and this universe is a result of not an accident but part of a plan and there is a creator out there. Believing in absolute truth is not a matter of choice.
okay quick post because i have an exam tomorrow..
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by chandigarh: *
OT: Ok, you must have read "Heart of Darkness" by Conrad too. Recall a line in which he says (i'm paraphrasing here) " There are the devils of sex, greed and bloodlust, but the devil that took me was the devil of folly" Makes a lot of sense if you read it after reading the underground.
[/QUOTE]
No I havent. Perhaps I will when I get time..I did find under western eyes ..spectacular. I didnt like underground too much..not after reading Brothers K and Crime and Punishment.
[QUOTE]
No mate, I disagree with you. The hypothesis approach holds more water than that appers right now as all we are doing is using standard debating tricks to get our point across.
[/QUOTE]
The hypothesis neither proves, nor disproves. Neither you, nor I used it incorrectly, yet both of us used it to get our points across.
Even in the hypothesis approach, the question hinges upon either of us providing evidence for substantiating our claim. That is it. That is what will settle the debate.
Evidence, is exactly what the Kuffar used to ask of the Prophet. 1400 years ago. Well before the scientific movement. Read the Quran. Read where they used to ask the Prophet.. to show them God..to give them a reason why they should believe him. Read how Allah points out his "nishaniyan"..as evidence for those who see, those who choose to see.
You say that everything else has made quantum leaps. I agree. You claim that all other scientific thought has bounded where theology is left behind. Odd is it not, that after so many movements in scientific thought, you come back to me with the same question they asked Muhammad..Nooh..perhaps Adam? All this evolution of thought, science, knowledge for nothing?
Is that not evidence of the absoluteness of this question? Does that not suggest to you the existence of absolute truth?
[QUOTE]
Fallacious argument really (imho). Please reread what you have said.
The only part that does make sense is that people believe (or not) as to what they are comfortable with.
Acceptable reason, but one I personally do not like. Its like a government/authority saying "Ignorance is Bliss" as people would rather be blissful than vexed.
[/QUOTE]
You liken their belief to ignorance. Yet your beliefs are not founded on any more knowledge than theirs. Your beliefs are as scientifically indefensible as theirs. The reasons you can give for what you believe, that there is no God, are subject to your experience, your feelings. Your reasons for your beliefs are exactly the same as theirs, with the exception that you find 'bliss' in believing the contrary to what they do. Perhaps its that sense of superiority you mentioned. I dont know.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by chandigarh: *
Would love to read what you do think.
[/QUOTE]
you will eventually. just have a very busy couple of days ahead..
You see that there is always a controller of everything in this universe. You look onto your PC, isn't it controlled by anyone. Even then, it crashes sometimes. So dont you think that there should be someone who is controlling this universe and this world so that there is no error in the creation of this world. You raise your eyes towards the sky. Isn't it created without pillars. Can any engineer create any roof without any pillar or any support.
Who is raising the sun every morning, giving you light, giving rain, so that you can grow your food, give you air and water so that you can live. HE created all of us and he is able to give us death. What do you think is it all happenning automatically.
There is no science which can give us air and give us food and water. There is only one GOD who is controlling and creating everything we have seen and what we have not seen.
First, we have to believe in ALLAH (GOD) and then the concept of Heaven/Hell comes.
This is what I say .
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by ravage: *
Evidence, is exactly what the Kuffar used to ask of the Prophet. 1400 years ago. Well before the scientific movement. Read the Quran. Read where they used to ask the Prophet.. to show them God..to give them a reason why they should believe him. Read how Allah points out his "nishaniyan"..as evidence for those who see, those who *choose to see.
[/QUOTE]
No, have not read the Koran. Could you or someone paraphrase the story?
[QUOTE]
Is that not evidence of the absoluteness of this question? Does that not suggest to you the existence of absolute truth?
[/QUOTE]
Or not! :D Catch-22!!
OT: Arthur Dent and Ford Prefect went looking for the "answer". In the end, Deep Thought (DT) gave the answer: 42
But then, what wuz the question?
erm.... Whuts 6x7?? :)
[QUOTE]
You liken their belief to ignorance.
[/QUOTE]
Misunderstood analogy. Kindly re-read that part of my post.
[QUOTE]
Yet your beliefs are not founded on any more knowledge than theirs.
[/QUOTE]
Really? I think they are (for whatever they are worth). Hence that superiority complex...
This should be another thread itself. Why should one accept the imposition of code of life/whuteva from ancient texts. Maybe we can have this discussion sometime....
[QUOTE]
Your beliefs are as scientifically indefensible as theirs.
[/QUOTE]
My beliefs were at first the remainder of whatever remained after scientifically attacking the conventional... So I regard that statement unqualified, unless you mean it in some other way.
[QUOTE]
Your reasons for your beliefs are exactly the same as theirs, with the exception that you find 'bliss' in believing the contrary to what they do.
[/QUOTE]
Thats your take on it.
The reasons for my beliefs are exactly the same as theirs???
In what way? Sure there are similarities in the process of 'belief', but that was never the point. It is, why the differnt conclusions....
regards,
Chd
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Naveed06: *
You see that there is always a controller of everything in this universe.
[/QUOTE]
No, I don't see. Its not that simple.
[QUOTE]
You raise your eyes towards the sky. Isn't it created without pillars. Can any engineer create any roof without any pillar or any support.
[/QUOTE]
Dude, do you even know what the 'sky' is?
[QUOTE]
Who is raising the sun every morning, giving you light, giving rain, so that you can grow your food, give you air and water so that you can live.
[/QUOTE]
Good questions. You have an answer. My question is, how/why did you come to that particular conclusion?
[QUOTE]
HE created all of us and he is able to give us death. What do you think is it all happenning automatically.
[/QUOTE]
OT: Why do you believe that "God" is a "HE"? Wh not a "SHE" or sexless?