# Why believe in "a" God? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 29, 2005, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967 "2005-09-29T02:32:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/161 "2005-09-30T18:02:26Z")
Oh yes, Supernatural is a nonsense word. Everything is natural, nothing is “extra-natural”. Erek ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/162 "2005-09-30T18:09:24Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > For the record, I do not have the same feeling about agnostics that I do about atheists, because atheism is a statement of faith, they are stating that a God definitively does not exist, and most do not even know what other people are defining as God as can be evidenced by the “Old Man in the sky” cliche. Whereas agnostics are merely saying “It has yet to be proven for me.” > > Erek I feel the same way about people who don’t believe in Invisible Pink-Unicorns. To not believe in them is a statement of faith. I much prefer people who just don’t think its proven. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/163 "2005-09-30T18:23:13Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > That sounds like philosophy of mind dualism: “the theory that the mental and the physical — or mind and body or mind and brain — are, in some sense, radically different kinds of thing”. No, I’m simply saying that information is not matter, but the arrangement of matter. > [@Liberal](#): > > Okay, maybe the function of a rock is a bit wiggly (at least from a modern human standpoint — a snake might find it to be a great shelter, and early man might have found it to be a great tool), but it seems to me that the function of stars is downright critical. Without them, there’d be nothing else, including brains. By what other means would you produce helium, iron, and other elements than by the process of stellar fusion? Actually, that’s my point. By supporting us, purpose-giving creatures, the star aquires purpose. A star in some lifeless galaxy would have no such thing. > [@mswas](#): > > Define Dead matter. Matter that isn’t alive ( duh ). > [@mswas](#): > > How can I ‘prove’ that the definition of a word is it’s definition? You were claiming “God IS the universe, God IS mathematics, God IS you, God IS your brain, God IS everything.”. That’s a claim of fact, not a word definition. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > Evolution, astronomy, cosmology. > > > [@mswas](#): > > > > All addressed by the mystic tradition. Which failed, where science suceeded. > [@mswas](#): > > Illuminati means “Illuminated one”. Misdirection is not a necessary property of the illuminated, in my experience is generally NOT a property of one. WHOOSH ! fnord > [@mswas](#): > > Well, first off you are claiming that rocks and stars do not evolve. Rocks being defined by their elemental composition only evolve in terms of shape, size and composition really.Stars most definitely have a lifecycle in which they change. That is not evolution. > [@](#): > > The claim that stars and rocks have no purpose is pretty specious. How exactly is a brickhouse standing if rocks have no purpose? Purpose is relative to property. We eat minerals because they affect our bodies in a certain way, minerals are rocks, that is purpose, they make up the crust of the Earth, that is purpose. Stars warm you and generate electricity, that’s a purpose. How is the firing of synapses more purposeful than a solar flare? They both at their most basic state are just discharges of energy, both have impact upon your life. Solar flares can cause disruptions in cell phone service, whereas your synapses can decide to make a phone call, both affect your ability to make that phone call. So how can the processes that you go through be anything less than random if everything outside of your brain is random? A brickhouse stands because someone put it there. Making up the crust of the Earth is not purpose. The external universe isn’t random; it’s had billions of years to evolve order. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/164 "2005-09-30T18:37:37Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > No, I’m simply saying that information is not matter, but the arrangement of matter. I agree, and the arrangement of that atom after it leaves your body was determined by it’s arrangement while it was part of your body. > [@](#): > > Matter that isn’t alive ( duh ). I’m so glad you’ve cleared that up for me. > [@](#): > > You were claiming “God IS the universe, God IS mathematics, God IS you, God IS your brain, God IS everything.”. That’s a claim of fact, not a word definition. Actually, I was defining God. > [@](#): > > Which failed, where science suceeded. Ummm…okay > [@](#): > > WHOOSH ! fnord It was a whoosh, except I know of the Illuminatus trilogy and love to play “Illuminati”. > [@](#): > > That is not evolution. Der Trihs has spoken!!! > [@](#): > > A brickhouse stands because someone put it there. Making up the crust of the Earth is not purpose. The external universe isn’t random; it’s had billions of years to evolve order. You aren’t even consistent. Erek ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/165 "2005-09-30T19:18:21Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > No, I’m simply saying that information is not matter, but the arrangement of matter. Maybe the answer to this question will help me understand your point of view: is “the arrangement of matter” a part of the physical universe? > [@](#): > > Actually, that’s my point. By supporting us, purpose-giving creatures, the star aquires purpose. A star in some lifeless galaxy would have no such thing. Well, physically speaking, all particles came from the same place — both those that compose you and those that compose lifeless matter in some distant galaxy (distant in time as well as space). You really can’t know what particle came from what star. So what happens then to purpose and significance? Must we assign purpose and significance to the whole universe, since we don’t know where our brain particles came from? Or must we assign purpose and significance to nothing for the same reason? After all, if significance is born in the brain’s knowledge (and I assume we mean the frontal cortex as opposed to the amygdala), and things are significant merley because the brain says they are, then may there not be significance to metaphysical things that the brain comprehends? Like God, for example? And that brings us to another question. This is a hypothetical, so bear with me. Suppose just for the sake of argument that you, and you alone, attached significance to human life. That is, suppose the whole world disagreed with you. Would human life still be significant? If so, will it still be significant after you die? And if not, doesn’t that make significance pretty insignificant? ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/166 "2005-09-30T19:41:04Z")
> [@](#): > > Which failed, where science suceeded. Is your argument that in all arenas mysticism has failed and science has succeeded? ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/167 "2005-09-30T20:44:41Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > If we’re starting from a place where we think God exists we might also consider that physical death is not so horrible. After death, true. Whether it is heaven or non-existence, not problem. However during death, not so good. > [@](#): > > It seems you object to those who see God as a Mommy and Daddy in the sky {so do I} and yet that’s the kind of God you’d prefer. There are three types of parents. One type holds hands all the time, and don’t let the kids out of their sight, and corrects immediately. Type 2 give broad guidelines and realize that kids have to make their own mistakes to grow. Some may be real bad, but you have to take that risk. Type 3 is so distant they might as well not exist - think Eloise’s mother. I agree that God type 1 is no good. We got an extreme case of God type 3. I’d like God type 2 myself. > [@](#): > > Would that be Daddy, Mommy. or both? > > That sounds sarcastic and I don’t mean it that way. I just think that we’re called to be peers not servants or children. Well, actually it is a god who might gently correct people doing evil in his name. I don’t mean a god that testifies in court like George Burns, but one that really doesn’t like having his name taken in vain. Is this really too much to ask of a deity? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/168 "2005-09-30T20:50:07Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Maybe the answer to this question will help me understand your point of view: is “the arrangement of matter” a part of the physical universe? Yes. Consider this : Take a bunch of rocks and pile them into a pyramid. That’s a pattern. Now scatter the rocks; they are unchanged, but the pyriamid - the pattern - is gone. The pyramid can’t exist without the rocks, but that doesn’t mean it’s not real. In the same way, I believe my mind is a pattern built of the structure and activity of my brain. It’s not a solid object the way the brain itself it, but it does have physical reality. > [@Liberal](#): > > So what happens then to purpose and significance? Must we assign purpose and significance to the whole universe, since we don’t know where our brain particles came from? Or must we assign purpose and significance to nothing for the same reason? After all, if significance is born in the brain’s knowledge (and I assume we mean the frontal cortex as opposed to the amygdala), and things are significant merley because the brain says they are, then may there not be significance to metaphysical things that the brain comprehends? Like God, for example? We can’t really give puropse to something unless we interact with it. Since we are presently limited to one plant and have existed for only a short time, we can only give purpose to a small amount of the universe. God _is_ significant, even though he is unreal. People kill and die over him, so in many ways his lack of reality doesn’t matter. > [@Liberal](#): > > And that brings us to another question. This is a hypothetical, so bear with me. Suppose just for the sake of argument that you, and you alone, attached significance to human life. That is, suppose the whole world disagreed with you. Would human life still be significant? If so, will it still be significant after you die? And if not, doesn’t that make significance pretty insignificant? Life is significant because it cares about things, feels things and does things. Your hypothetical race of semi-sociopaths would still think and feel and plan; they and their doings would still have significance, although I question how long they would bother to stay alive. > [@Maeglin](#): > > Is your argument that in all arenas mysticism has failed and science has succeeded? Yes. ---
**Author:** ![jargan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/dbc845/32.png) [@jargan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jargan)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/169 "2005-09-30T20:54:39Z")
One answer could be…Why do you (or any one else claim to) believe that the resurrection of Christ is a historical fact? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/170 "2005-09-30T20:57:03Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Is this really too much to ask of a deity? Forgive my butting in, Voyager, but your question touches upon something meaningful for me. As you probably know, my own theology posits that God simply gives every person the desires of his heart — one man’s heaven is another man’s hell, and whatnot. That is my understanding of Jesus’ teachings. However, I really don’t understand the premise underlying the sort of objection to mainstream Christianity that you pose. And so I ask this question, not to oppose you, but to understand you. Let’s say for the sake of argument that the mainstreamers are right. God requires acceptance of Him, and that the consequence of refusal is to suffer eternity in Hell. The question then to me becomes, is this really too much to ask of a person? I mean, He isn’t requiring that you do anything beyond your mental or physical bounds. He isn’t demanding that you smash into buildings, climb mountains, and walk barefoot over molten steel. His requirement, in fact, is exceedingly humble given His alleged power and status. It seems to me that it is indeed too much to ask of a deity that He impugn His own holiness and purity by acquiescing to those who couldn’t care less about Him anyway. Do you understand the question? It is difficult to phrase, and I might not have been clear. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/171 "2005-09-30T21:04:42Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > If a life of say 70 years of struggle, or even illness is compared to eternal life, it isn’t so horrible. If we are indeed spirit first and physical temporarily then a lifetime is like a ride at the amusement park. While we’re on it we might be scared as hell, but when it’s over we don’t take it as seriously. > > Also in this perspective when people rail against all the horrible things that happen that happen as evidence there’s no God, it’s like being pissed because the ride was too scary after chooseing to go on it. We all die. In the grand scheme of things, it matters little if we die horribly or peacefully in our sleep. Though it’s not hard to get along with somebody else’s troubles, out of empathy I’d prefer that no one had to spend their last seconds in pain and fear. And I don’t see what it matters to a god if we do or not. To address Lib’s comment, while the universe probably won’t be affected if our whole planet gets sterilized five minutes from now, people do exist, people do have feelings, and I prefer that people, if possible, do not suffer. I’m quite the materialist, but don’t see why this is an issue with materialism. ---
**Author:** ![Erinaceus\_europaeus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47774/32.png) [@Erinaceus\_europaeus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Erinaceus_europaeus)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/172 "2005-09-30T21:08:25Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > However, I really don’t understand the premise underlying the sort of objection to mainstream Christianity that you pose. And so I ask this question, not to oppose you, but to understand you. Let’s say for the sake of argument that the mainstreamers are right. God requires acceptance of Him, and that the consequence of refusal is to suffer eternity in Hell. > The question then to me becomes, is this really too much to ask of a person? Forgive my butting in too, please 🙂 Supposing the christian god exists. He also requires not worshipping any other gods. (AFAIK implicitly acknowledging other gods also exist, tell me if I’m wrong). Why should the christian god be so special? I mean, what reason is there to believe him and not some other god(s)? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/173 "2005-09-30T21:13:24Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > However, I really don’t understand the premise underlying the sort of objection to mainstream Christianity that you pose. And so I ask this question, not to oppose you, but to understand you. Let’s say for the sake of argument that the mainstreamers are right. God requires acceptance of Him, and that the consequence of refusal is to suffer eternity in Hell. > > The question then to me becomes, is this really too much to ask of a person? I mean, He isn’t requiring that you do anything beyond your mental or physical bounds. He isn’t demanding that you smash into buildings, climb mountains, and walk barefoot over molten steel. His requirement, in fact, is exceedingly humble given His alleged power and status. It seems to me that it is indeed too much to ask of a deity that He impugn His own holiness and purity by acquiescing to those who couldn’t care less about Him anyway. Do you understand the question? It is difficult to phrase, and I might not have been clear. He’s asking me to grovel before him, on pain of eternal torture. That is far to much to ask, especially since a god that allows an eternal hell to exist is an evil god. I have no desire to grovel and fawn before anyone, much less a God of Torture. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/174 "2005-09-30T21:17:29Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > Yes. Consider this : Take a bunch of rocks and pile them into a pyramid. That’s a pattern. Now scatter the rocks; they are unchanged, but the pyriamid - the pattern - is gone. The pyramid can’t exist without the rocks, but that doesn’t mean it’s not real. > > In the same way, I believe my mind is a pattern built of the structure and activity of my brain. It’s not a solid object the way the brain itself it, but it does have physical reality. Your view is honestly fascinating, almost eclectic. Typically, things are said to have physical reality when they can be empirically tested. A pyramid, on the other hand, is an analytic object; that is, a thing is a pyramid because of, and only because of, the definition of a pyramid. Contrast that to a subatomic particle, which can be detected by empirical means. Regardless of how you define it or label it, a thing goes flying out from a collision and leaves a trace of its existence. With pyramids, triangles, and numbers and such, no such thing. If we did not define the number one as the successor of zero and apply the Induction Axiom, we could not even prove that one plus one equals two. > [@](#): > > We can’t really give puropse to something unless we interact with it. Since we are presently limited to one plant and have existed for only a short time, we can only give purpose to a small amount of the universe. That seems to contradict… > [@](#): > > God _is_ significant, even though he is unreal. People kill and die over him, so in many ways his lack of reality doesn’t matter. …this. Your statement above requires that for something to have purpose, we must interact with it. If God’s purpose indeed is to serve as an excuse for murder and martyrdom, then that must mean that people interact with God. And yet, if God is not real, then how are people interacting with something not real? > [@](#): > > Life is significant because it cares about things, feels things and does things. Your hypothetical race of semi-sociopaths would still think and feel and plan; they and their doings would still have significance, although I question how long they would bother to stay alive. Is Yodr Fipp, my imaginary childhood friend, significant? He cared about me very much, felt proud of me, and took upon himself the blame for a lot of wicked little things that I did. Does significance imply purpose, and therefore reality? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/175 "2005-09-30T21:19:41Z")
> [@Erinaceus europaeus](#): > > Forgive my butting in too, please 🙂 > > Supposing the christian god exists. He also requires not worshipping any other gods. (AFAIK implicitly acknowledging other gods also exist, tell me if I’m wrong). Why should the christian god be so special? I mean, what reason is there to believe him and not some other god(s)? Well you can’t have it both ways. You began by positing His existence and declaration of uniqueness. You cannot then ask what reason there is to believe in Him and not some other god. The reason is in your premise. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/176 "2005-09-30T21:19:53Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > However, I really don’t understand the premise underlying the sort of objection to mainstream Christianity that you pose. And so I ask this question, not to oppose you, but to understand you. Let’s say for the sake of argument that the mainstreamers are right. God requires acceptance of Him, and that the consequence of refusal is to suffer eternity in Hell. My response was to **cosmosdan** question about what God I would like to see. It is not really an objection to Christianity, or any other religion for that matter. I don’t disbelieve in any particular deity because of the moral code of a religion, but because of lack of evidence and evidence of lack. I’m also not saying that any god must have the characteristics I mention, only that would be a god worthy of worship in my opinion. If you got to design a deity, would you design one with hell or one without hell? I’m a bit skewed, because the religion I got brought up in had no hell, and I never heard a sermon mentioning it. I think there are some issues in defining a god who allows a hell as being omnibenevolent, but I’m not sure I see omnibenevolence as a necessary condition for a god. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/177 "2005-09-30T21:20:32Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally Posted by Maeglin > Is your argument that in all arenas mysticism has failed and science has succeeded? > > Yes. You are misinformed, **Der Trihs**. Scientific inquiry can offer us little or no insight on many fundamental human questions. Mysticism has answered these questions satisfactorily for many people, and its full range continues to be explored. ---
**Author:** ![Erinaceus\_europaeus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47774/32.png) [@Erinaceus\_europaeus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Erinaceus_europaeus)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/178 "2005-09-30T21:24:56Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Well you can’t have it both ways. You began by positing His existence and declaration of uniqueness. You cannot then ask what reason there is to believe in Him and not some other god. The reason is in your premise. I did position his existence. I did not position his uniqueness (as the only god), and neither does he, as far as I know (but as I said, correct me if I’m wrong, and a cite would be nice). Also, I don’t believe (as in trust) in some people who I know do exist. That’s a matter of faith. Even if god existed why should I trust him? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/179 "2005-09-30T21:30:06Z")
> [@Erinaceus europaeus](#): > > I did position his existence. I did not position his uniqueness (as the only god), and neither does he, as far as I know (but as I said, correct me if I’m wrong, and a cite would be nice). You said, “Supposing the christian god exists. He also requires not worshipping any other gods.” That posits both His existence, and his declaration that He is unique. > [@](#): > > Also, I don’t believe (as in trust) in some people who I know do exist. That’s a matter of faith. Even if god existed why should I trust him? Now that’s a good question. I think you should be allowed to freely and volitionally give or withhold your consent. As it happens, so does He. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967/180 "2005-09-30T21:31:17Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > If you got to design a deity, would you design one with hell or one without hell? For me, it wouldn’t make any difference. Being with Him is heaven, and without Him is hell. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-believe-in-a-god/323967.md?page=10)