Why should one believe in God?

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

I’ve been having this question in my head from quite a long time. As a kid, i used to visit the nearby temple daily, pray sincerely ,listen to stories from hindu mythology told by my grandmother. But slowly, i started finding a lot of things that simply didn’t make sense . Like God being supremely powerful, yet , not making all human beings to be good and peace loving people. Another thing was about God testing humans with all kinds of acid tests - why does he have to do all that when he is the all-knowing one?

I had a lot of christian friends at school, since i come from a christian dominated society in India. Christianity held more appeal for me that hinduism, because i found that it was a much more practical religion and most christians knew what was written in the bible appoximately atleast, whereas, in hinduism, not even 1% of the hindus ever get to read the vedas in their lifetime. Most hindus dont even read the Bhagavad Gita , which , i consider as a real treasure for the spiritually oriented person, independant of his/her religion. Most hindus consider the ramayana and mahabharatha as holy books, but i’d say, the stories in these books are not to be taken literally.

But even in christianity, i came across similar ideas - God testing humans,God killing bad people,etc. And then , i got to read a bible. I found many stories simply unbelievable, maybe they too , like ramayana , weren’t meant to be taken literally! I felt that the bible was worse than hindu mythology, because of the ease with which the verses in the bible can be (mis)interpreted variedly.

Finally , after a lot of thought, i have come to the conclusion that there is no God. All religions are a collection of ideas and stories with good morals, which would ensure that the people who follow it would lead virtuous lives. God is just an imaginary being, who mostly represents the human conscience. God was necessary in religions to make sure that people don’t challenge the rules of the religion and become unruly.

In a modern society , i feel that there is no need for a God. Moral values can be instilled by laws of the state and thru proper education and bringing up. Modern man needs to think in a logical way, and the idea of God shouldn’t create mental blocks .

2

You should read Buddhism. Buddha said "You should not accept anything because I said so. Put it to the test of logic and accept what is agrreable" Buddhism is also silent on the question of god. I guess Buddha was the most intelligent and original philosopher to come from India. Shankara was definitely brilliant but original only in bits and pieces.

3

Dear Queer,

I like your conclusions. I only have one disagreement where you suggest that "moral values can be instilled by the laws of the state……..education…etc." I completely oppose legislating "morality". Of course I am making a distinction between "crimes" and "moral standards". For example, having an extra marital affair is a perceived "moral standard" but not a crime.

4

Dear NYAhmedi,
That is where proper up bringing and education count.

ZZ,
I had read a bit on buddhism, the idea of simplicity is appealing, but extremely difficult to practise. Moreover, buddhism no longer remains simple, with it's various sects and rituals as grand as any other religion, it has strayed wildly from Gauthama Buddha's ideas. Maybe Taoism is ok, but it sounds a bit too communist oriented ;)

[This message has been edited by queer (edited May 17, 1999).]

5

queer,
You based your conclusion on the argument that 'why does God have to test all the people and then punish them with eternal fire... why go to all that trouble?' This, my dear friend may be a valid question, but is not technically a sound argument to come to a decision about the absence or presence of God. I mean, if the God does exist, how can me or anyone else think from His perspective. The most, you can do is to argue that "I don't like this policy of His at all" but you can not prove His absence based on something you don't like or don't understand.

People look for proof of God's presence and they forget that it's equally hard to prove that there is no God.

Anyway, to me, the universe itself is a proof that God exists. This may sound cliche ridden, but personally whenever I look at the universe and our own existence, the only way I can explain the series of co-incidences is to have some higher being controlling everything. Universe is such a huge place, that to have a single occurance of a phenomenon (intelligent life) the probability has to be really small (so that it becomes one when multiplied by the huge size of universe). You can argue there has to be more extra terrestrial (sp?) intelligence, but then I'll ask, where the hell are they ? Why haven't they contacted us ? Or do we have to suppose, that we are the leaders among the civilisations and that we'll have to make the first contact ? This 'll be another BIG co-incidence. Don't forget that assuming, intelligent life to be carbon based, requiring oxygen is another big assumption with no basis whatsoever. We do have to make this assumption, otherwise universe would be teeming with intelligent life everywhere. Then even, if we buy all that, it's too over-the-top for me to assume, that for a place which has no beginning and no end, with eternal time, we are the most advanced civilisation, and in particular our time and generation (20th century) is the one where people finally realised that God was just a make believe entity for enforcing moral standards - a realisation which altered the way intelligent life perceived universe from that era onwards. I guess, what I am trying to say, is that for a place with eternal time (and many civilisations other than our own) human beings to have such absolute and distinctive chronological events and standards, is one hell of an odd.

I am a skeptic and I question everything and this is the very reason I believe in God.

Whether you agree with His policies or not is another matter.

I am sorry I wrote my views in a very jumbled way. I don't have the ability to write my thoughts clearly like most other posters here do.

My chaar aanay.

Finally, NYAhmadi said,

For example, having an extra marital affair is a perceived "moral standard" but not a crime.<

Ask this to a partner who got cheated.

[This message has been edited by deepblue (edited May 17, 1999).]

6

Every time I pay My rent on time I know there is a God.

7

In that case, never think about moving to San Francisco/San Jose. Your 'iman' 'll be in danger there.

8

LOL!

Stud

9

Forgive me but ….i cut and pasted from my previous reply to your thread.
… People look for proof of God's presence and they forget that it's equally hard to prove
that there is no God….

I guess I'm like deepblue, I think everything around us shows that god does exist. I've had to many things happen in life not to believe that God was guiding me and is present.

……..verses in the bible can be (mis)interpreted variedly…..

Queer….i think god sends his message in a manner that it will hold meaning for us all and for differnet times in our lives and in human existance. There are verses in the quran that today hold a total different and new meaning secondary to advances in science and technology. The books are not a recipe for perfection but simply guidelines on what to do.

Religion is a guideline of life, solace during tribulation, encouragement during joys and a consistent presence in a changing world. It offers a means to understand an incomprehensible world…. and allows us to know that our creator is present.

I can understand that the doubt created because of the abundance of religions that exist. Who's right? What is right? or are all of them wrong. However, religion is how man has chosen to worship god and to understand his messages….the differences and different names are alterations made by humans.

I don't have the perception that this is all a test…we are given life into this world and we do our best to live it within the guidelines given to us. The punishment maybe for the sinners….but it could also be to offer consolation to those wronged in this life and are unable to gain compensation. In addition, one can't have good without evil…at least in the manner we exist.

10

How can you believe in God when you don't even know God?

The hindu idea of God is a piece of clay or whatever shaped in a certain way. The shape is made up in the head of the person who makes it i.e. the hindu religious books don't say what their God or Gods look like.

Would you consider a piece of clay as your Creator.

Making shapes out of clay and selling them as Gods was what the Arab traders did in the past, it was a good source of income.

Another question comes to mind, which God do you turn to?

When it comes to Christianity why does God need a son? why not a daughter? or a whole family? Why is Jesus (A.S.) considered to be white? What's the purpose of this idea? If Jesus is considered to be the son of God then why did the Christians stop following the law that Jesus (A.S.) brought with him? What or who gave them the authority?

Too many unanswered questions.

The Muslim idea of God is far more superior to any religion.

We have been created to serve God. We do this by following God's law. Whether we do or don't will not affect God, it will only mean that we will either go to Heaven or Hell.

God's law is here to uphold God's authority. If you look at the laws of a state, the state keeps its authority through its laws.

God without Angels, Humans, Jinn etc has no authority i.e. God cannot show his authority.

If you look at us Humans, we are better than x or faster than x or stronger than x or more capable than x because x exists.

If you look at one Allah's names, Al-Ghaffar which is, The Forgiving. How can Allah be Al-Ghaffar when there is nothing to forgive.

We have been created to serve God, the effect of us serving God uphold's God's attributes and His Supreme Authority.

Whether we spend eternity in Heaven or Hell will not in any way affect God's authority.

To my brothers and sisters who are reading this why is it that you think that the Muslim idea of God can't be proved by logic. How can Al-Haq be illogical?

The answer to queer's question would be, why should anyone deny reality? Whether anyone goes to heaven or hell depends on whether the person has rejected Islam or not, but why should anyone deny reality?

11

deepblue,

there was a pretty good proof of God's non-existance in "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". I don't exactly remeber it, but i'll post it later. :)

  1. >The most, you can do is to argue that "I don't like this policy of His at all" but you can not prove His absence based on something you don't like or don't understand.<

True,i don't like his style at all, he seems more like a lazy experimentor to me, so i don't see a reason for his glorification.

  1. Abou what u wrote about the existance of life.

I didn't understand the probability part.
Why should the idea that life exists only on the earth be proof of existance? I'd say that it is a disproof of existance, because, if God was around, he would have created life on every possible planet he liked. When pure chance has it's way, only one in a billion planets will have living forms.

3.About ETs not contacting us.
I believe that ETs may exist. Calculations based on the size of the universe,probability of planet formation and probability of earth like properties for a planet show that there should be a lot of other planets with life, maybe in another solar system or even galaxy.

However, even if they exist, contacting us would be virtually impossible simply because of the distance that separates them from us.The nearest star other than the sun to us is around 4(?)light years away.So forget about other galaxies.

4.About life based on carbon needing oxygen.
That has a proper accepted explanation. Oxygen is an element which can be used to liberate most energy (after flourine),when it combines with carbon and hydrogen, and it was abundant on our planet.
However, it is not that oxygen is absolutely reqd for life. There r plenty of anaerobic organisms.
there are many which substitute sulphur for oxygen in high sulphur content environments like hot springs.

I am sorry I wrote my views in a very jumbled way. I don't have the ability to write my thoughts clearly like most other posters here do.<

Hey! Don't make fun of me! U r second only to Achtung in that aspect. i mean about writing Ur thoughts clearly.

12

Kashmirigirl,

I think everything around us shows that god does exist. <

I think everything around us shows how beautifully evolution takes place, to create what is best for the surroundings.

Most people find it difficult to accept that there can be beauty in science and mathematics. My experiences with science makes me feel that it is the most wonderful thing in the world, it's a key to unlock any mystery, only thing , be prepared to accept a lot of symmetry and precision in what u see. And not to mistakenly take it to be the work of some supernatural being.

There are verses in the quran that today hold a total different and new meaning secondary to advances in science and technology. The books are not a recipe for perfection but simply guidelines on what to do.<

This shows the power of positive thinking. While reading a holy book , no one usually looks for negative things, priests, who r expected to be humane people , interpret them for the good of the people. Still no necessity of God.

And if God did intend to create diff. religions, why didn't he just create one language, one kind of people? Life would have been a lot simpler and peaceful.
However, science says that variations are what lead to further evolution of species into more adept and suitable species.

punishment could also be to offer consolation to those wronged in this life and are unable to gain compensation<
mighty wrong concept i say! If i get wronged, please wrong my neighbour too , and i'll be happy? Sounds real bad! and should lead to chain reactions :)

one can't have good without evil…at least in the manner we exist.<
Exactly! So why should God let this go on?

13

Mudassar,
Let me first clear Ur misunderstandings on hinduism. True most hindus worship idols,(they r mostly stone or multi-metal alloy and not clay), but hinduism clearly isn't one religion. One branch of hinduism called Advaitha clearly advocates only one-God, no idol worship. No one here is qualified to comment on hinduism's nuances, all we know is what we have encountered . Mostly, hinduism has wasted away into rituals.

About Ur question "Why does God need a son? Why not a daughter?".
Because it was either son or daughter and son won the toss.
Irrelevant question, irrelevant answer.

"The muslim idea of God is far superior to others"<
Have u known any other religion as well as Islam? U are a muslim , only because u were born as one.

About what u wrote about God's athority and our being created to slave for him.
Makes me feel like God is as bad as Hitler, sending people to hell if they don't accept his supreme authority.

And if he indeed is the supreme entity, why doesn't he just plainly show himself ? That surely will solve a lot of problems.

I don't know much about Islam, but i don't think God would have had his messenger note down that polygyny is permitted, but not polyandry, that women can't worship him in mosques, that women are only half as acceptible as witnesses. Islam strikes me as a very male oriented religion. Sure , it is extremely powerful and can drive people along with the passion that it inspires, but still, why would God be a male?

14

queer, vedanta concept of god is not similar to Islam. Vedanta says that everything is god. that is you and me and stones and internet, the same spirit is there in everything. the god is in that sense indistinguishable from the world. vedanta is a concept of unity.

islaam, on the other hand is more like dvaita in indian philosophy. in islam, world is different from god, humans are different from other animals, prophet is different from humans, non-muslims are different from muslims and so on. it is perfect dvaita.

mudasser does not know anything on hinduism or christianity except what he heard in mosques. mosques, i am afraid are not a right place to learn any religion including islam.

[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited May 18, 1999).]

15

"A desert nomad was asked about the existense of God. He said "Camel droppings point to the existense of a camel. Footprints in the sand tell of a traveller. The Heavens with its stars, the earth with its mountains and valleys and the sea with its waves - do they not point to the Creator???

This argument applies to the notion of casuality; an essential principal of rational thought. From the existense of camel's droppings, one can immediately, with doubt agree that there must exist a camel. In like manner the nomad applies the principal of casuality to the whole world

A similar analogy might be if we were to come upon a beach where pebbles and stones had been arranged in an intricate pattern, we would feel no hesitation in jumping to the conclusion that someone had arranged them in such a manner. Although it is theoretically possible that the sea could have deposited the stones and pebbles in such a manner by chance, it would be considered highly unlikely.

Suppose then while walking in the woods we come upon a machine. Our attitude toward the machine would be very different to that of a nearby stone. We would deduce that this machine had not been deposited by the elements but was the product of an engineer who had built it. Even if the machine was unlike anything we had seen before, the intricacies of the machine alone would be sufficient for us to conclude that it had been made by an engineer. We would never assume that the machine had come into existense accidentally.

The machine like the engineer is like the universe to God, but human beings and animals are not like machines. However the simplest creature is far complex than any machine ever designed by an engineer. If the engineer designed the machine, who other than god designed the universe??

The standard argument put forward to counter this 'design' argument is that the universe came into being purely by chance through the random forces of nature millions of years ago. Thus the diversity and the intricacy found in humans and animals is put down to chance. This argument holds that there is no purpose behind the universe and the comlexity and the intricacy of the world.

All theses factors are evident in Imam Shafi's answer to the question of what is the proof for the existense of God. He replied, "The leaf of the mullberry tree! Its colour, smell taste and everything about it seem one and the same to you. However, if a caterpillar eats it and it comes out as fine silken thread. A bee feeds on it and it comes out as honey. A sheep eats it and it comes out as dung. Gazzelles chew on it and it congeals producing the fragrance of musk. Who has made all these different things come from the same type of leaf?"

Such intricate relationships require an intelligent purposeful 'mind' behind the world and the not the random unconcious and unintelligent process of change. The occurrence of events requiring to explain them, as done here by Imam Shafi, is positive proof for the designer of the world, Allah (swt)

Everything we see around us is LIMITED and DEPENDANT. Limited, meaning that everything has a start point and an end point. Take for example a box it has eight corners and has start and end points. It takes a limited amount of space. An example on a larger scale is the earth. If someone asked you to pick up a pen and draw an object with limitless boundries, could you? No, it is not possible
Dependant, meaning that nothing is self sustaining and exists of its own accord.The sum of all things limited and dependant is limited or finite and all finite things have a begining and an end. Thus we can only deduce there has to be something outside the boundaries of LIMITED AND DEPENDANT to sustain them. This through rational and enlightened thought we have come to call God or Allah who is infinite and self-subsistent.

16

Takbeer!

Bravo Xtreme.

Minhaj

17

Mr Xtreme

That was excellent!

18

Wow Xtreme,
after reading Ur post i almost said "Oh My God". :)
Superb man! Can't say that U convinced me that God exists, but now i stand no chance of arguing convincingly against Ur essay. But let me make a try all the same.

I gather from having read Ur post that Ur main point of argument is how the comlexities of living forms could be the result of pure chance.

Evolution desn't take place due to pure chance alone. Hope i manage to put it clearly!
Whenever offsprings are produced, they bear slight changes from what their parents were like. These changes are purely random and can be either for the better or the worse for the offspring.

Now, if the change is for the worse, other offsprings do better than this one, and manage to survive and breed more easily. Our guy loses out to competetion and fails to produce many offsprings to propagate the change in him.

On the other hand, if the change helps the guy survive better, he can overtake most of the competetion and succeeds in propagating the change in him thru his offsprings.

As a result of this process over billions of years, changes for the better have been improving upon living forms.

And a particular generation of offsprings may have more than one kind of desirable variations from its parent generation, which may lead to the evolution of one species into two!

It becomes all the more convincing when u find that a lot of palaentological evidence in support. One popular example is about how giraffes, whose ancestors had short necks like deers, "grew" long necks. In the african grass lands, as the population of grass eaters kept growing, a particular variant offspring with a longer neck who could eat leaves off tree branches managed to stave away competetion, thus being able to survive better.

So U see why evolution cannot be called an "unintelligent process of change".

Sorry, but i didn't understand the last part of Ur essay about limitedness and dependence of everything known to us proving that God exists.

[This message has been edited by queer (edited May 18, 1999).]

19

queer,

there was a pretty good proof of God's non-existance in "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". I don't exactly remeber it, but i'll post it later.<

Please, not that "if God can do anything, can He create a rock that He can't lift?" question... and for three reasons,
1- The question has an inherent flaw in its structure,
2- Even with the flaw, there's an answer but it's almost as puerile as the question
3- I don't like Douglas Adams and his style of humor at all.

My apologies, if you were hinting about some other thing.

I didn't understand the probability part. Why should the idea that life exists only on the earth be proof of existance?<

Think about it. If the phenomenon was common enough (and even with the worst odds SETI scientists believe there should be thousands of intelligent civilisations in just milky way alone, because of the "size"), it'd remove that 'mysterious' factor out of the thing which divides intelligent life and all other things. It'll be a common enough phenomenon.

Universe is of such close to infinite proportions, that you have to expect either one OR close to infinite civilisations. There is no middle ground.

I'd say that it is a disproof of existance, because, if God was around, he would have created life on every possible planet he liked. When pure chance has it's way, only one in a billion planets will have living forms.<

I told you before, it's not wise to base your argument on what God 'd like to do. How can you think from His perspective ?

And I'd say, if God was not around and if it were all chance, we should have had those lots and lots and lots of civilisations.

3.About ETs not contacting us. I believe that ETs may exist. Calculations based on the size of the universe,probability of planet formation and probability of earth like properties for a planet show that there should be a lot of other planets with life, maybe in another solar system or even galaxy.<

Like I said, the probability theory does say that intelligent life should be present here in our galaxy. Even though they really can't account for the start of life out of nowhere, they give it a very high weightage factor, out of their inability to treat it any other way.

However, even if they exist, contacting us would be virtually impossible simply because
of the distance that separates them from us.The nearest star other than the sun to us is around 4(?)light years away.So forget about other galaxies.<

You are right, Sirius is 4 light years away. And further away is the system of Alpha Centauri, which many people believe to be very conducive for life or at least a habitable place.

But I wasn't talking about contact only in the sci-fi sense of flying saucers and intergalactic carriers. But also the way, we humans are trying to contact other civilisations. Radiating out signals, doing whatever the best we can. In case of lot of civilisations, we should assume that at least half of them must be on a higher place at technological ladder (some of them doing their own search for billions of years) and yet we see no sign of it (and I am talking about only our galaxy). I say, if we have other civilisations in our part of galaxy, then we have to be the most advanced one for not hearing from the others, in some way.

By the way, you may want to read about the theory of wormholes and how it could allow you to travel distances in light years (and all that is based on relativity theory)

Anyway, in my opinion, the uniqueness of our existence is the biggest proof of the presence of a higher force.

My apologies for another long post.

[This message has been edited by deepblue (edited May 18, 1999).]

20

deepblue,

Sorry, but that wasn't the proof...it was some sort of an assumption-contradiction one.

U are right about the number of inhabited planets in the Milky way being large, it comes to millions! But on an average, it means around 300 light years spacing between various civilizations.

We've hardly discovered any other star with a confirmed planetary system. This is only because of the atronomical distances that separate us and most stars. Even though calling milkyway "our" galaxy makes it seem close, we can hardly see 5000 stars with our naked eyes. And many of these aren't from our galaxy.

BTW, i think sirius is not the closest star, it is just the brightest. The closest is one of the twin stars of centaurus, either alpha or beta, i'm not sure.

About radiating out signals:
The fastest signals (we know yet),are electromagnetic waves, which travel at the speed fo light. Even if some civilization far away sends out EM waves, the power required would be enormous to maintain a good Signal to Noise ratio when it reaches the earth for us to notice it as a message and not to regard it as stellar noise.

We do have radio sources in outerspace called pulsars ( or was it quasars?) which emit EM waves with extremely high periodicity. Who knows, maybe someone IS signalling?

One more problem with EM waves is , what frequency should u be looking for, what bandwidth, what kind of modulation did the ETs use?

Even though they really can't account for the start of life out of nowhere, they give
it a very high weightage factor, out of their inability to treat it any other way. <

Scientists have accounted for how life can be created from purely non-living stuff.
Infact, they have succeeded in creating nucleic acids that make up DNA and RNA , by simulating conditions on primitive earth,
viz.an atmosphere of ammonia,water vapor, and carbondioxide, and simulated lightning using electric discharges. It has also been observed that a solution of nucleic acids in such an environment form small globules of concentrated nucleic acids, with fatty acid coats. Though the scientists haven't succeeded in producing life artificially yet, the possibility is pretty high.

Haven't heard about wormholes, but there is some theory on particles called tachyons being able to move faster than light, but if the existance of tachyons is proved it would challenge the theory of relativity.

I don't mind Ur long post at all, I'd rather read thru long posts on this kind of stuff rather than read page after page of religious mudslinging.Actually, my post looks quite long too. ;)