Which gods don't you believe in, and why don't you?
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5765
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Which gods don't you believe in, and why don't you?
1. Do you believe in Zeus and his parents Cronus and Rhea and the other gods of ancient Greek religion? If not, why not?
2. Do you believe Allah as described in Islam exists? If not, why not?
3. Do you believe Xenu and the thetans as described by Scientology exist?
4. Do you believe "God" as described by Christianity exists? If not, why not?
5. Do you believe in Amaterasu and Susanoo and the other gods of the Shinto religion? If not, why not?
6. Do you believe in Cai Shen the Chinese god of prosperity and Zao Jun the Chinese kitchen god as described by Chinese traditional religion?
7. Do you believe Adonai as described by Judaism exists? If not, why not?
8. Do you believe Vishnu, Indra, Agni and the other Hindu gods exist? If not, why not?
9. Do you believe in Waheguru the god of the Sikhism religion? If not, why not?
I have to assume that your answer to at least 8 of those 9 questions is no. I'm curious to see what reasons people have for not believing in the existence of some gods, particularly if they believe in one or more other gods.
As for me, I'm an atheist. My answer to all of those questions is no. I don't believe things without evidence, particularly supernatural things that would invalidate currently known natural laws concluded from valid inductive inference. No religion's mythology meets my standard of belief. I'd sooner believe in Big Foot, as the evidence for his existence is closer to meeting my standard of belief but still insufficient.
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
- Abiathar
- Posts: 247
- Joined: April 29th, 2008, 5:32 pm
- Location: Angkor Wat.
1. Do you believe in Zeus and his parents Cronus and Rhea and the other gods of ancient Greek religion? If not, why not? Personally No. I do however believe in the concept of ascension, wherein in cyclic periods individuals "Ascend" or step to a slightly higher level of consciousness inwhich allows them to manipulate the quantum foam of what we currently perceive as reality. In this, we call them 'Gods'. Also, through out history, there appears to be the same number of gods in each pantheon (I do not just mean Major Gods, there were also hundreds of 'Small Gods' in every pantheon.)
2. Do you believe Allah as described in Islam exists? If not, why not? No, I do believe that the Entity that they are describing exists, but its personality is so vastly inhuman that the personification ascribed to Allah cannot be true.
3. Do you believe Xenu and the thetans as described by Scientology exist? Potentially possible, and it does agree with some of the most ancient of religions... granted these religions didn't think you had to PAY for treatment, nor did they think there was one, they did infact believe in both duality, and the concept that innumerable years ago both the human race existed, and said race was inhabited by highly psychic entities from another world. So... Plausible.
4. Do you believe "God" as described by Christianity exists? If not, why not? Same reason I do not believe in Allah as described by the Islams, being as it is the same entity
5. Do you believe in Amaterasu and Susanoo and the other gods of the Shinto religion? If not, why not? Same as answer 1
6. Do you believe in Cai Shen the Chinese god of prosperity and Zao Jun the Chinese kitchen god as described by Chinese traditional religion? also same as answer 1
7. Do you believe Adonai as described by Judaism exists? If not, why not? Same as answer 2 and 4
8. Do you believe Vishnu, Indra, Agni and the other Hindu gods exist? If not, why not? Personally, in this case, Yes I do. Incidently, I do not believe that they were God's however even the Hindu stated that they came from the sky in flying machines... Sooo.
9. Do you believe in Waheguru the god of the Sikhism religion? If not, why not? This... umm Okay, Wonderful Teacher, as the name describes, conflicts with the concept that the entity created everything. Why would an entity that can form a universe from nothing feel the fundamental desire to come down and teach things. However, like Vishnu and the Hindu lot, I do believe in alien life forms, and also that they have interacted with the humans of ancient times. So... Again Plausible.
Hmm, in retrospect, I think that all of the faiths DO have something going for them, I just think that the human concept of them is off.
- Alun
- Posts: 1118
- Joined: July 11th, 2009, 8:55 pm
The God I believe in is not on that list, although He has similarities to 2, 4, 7, and 8. The reason I believe in the God I believe in is because He most coheres with my intuitive understanding of reality in and of itself, and especially with my understanding of people. By intuitive I do not just mean my first gut reaction, but the way I lean when there is not even a hint of rational breeze blowing, such as is the case in considerations about ultimate reality.
That is to say, I have faith for entirely personal, subjective reasons. I do not think my faith is a reason for anyone else to accept or reject any beliefs about ultimate reality. I do not think my faith is directly relevant to empirical truth, ethics, or logical truth. If my faith serves any substantive role in my choices, it is only to motivate me when all else fails, or to support motives that I already have.
- Zewpals
- Premium Member
- Posts: 184
- Joined: June 16th, 2010, 11:25 am
I didn't know that there was evidence that a god didn't exist . You do believe in no god, don't you?I don't believe things without evidence, particularly supernatural things that would invalidate currently known natural laws concluded from valid inductive inference.
Anyway....
1) Nope. Lightning has been explained to a relatively-sound degree by science and is efficient enough to derive that an old man sitting on top of Mount Olympus does not throw lightning bolts. People have climbed Mount Olympus and photographs have been taken. There is a severe lack of evidence in the existence of any literal manifestations of Greek mythologies so I therefore do not believe in these gods.
2)No, mainly because I don't even know what Allah is as explained in Islam. I can't believe in something I don't perceive.
3)No, same reason as number 2.
4)No. This is mainly because I don't trust the humans who wrote the bible as perfect people who do not lie, do not intentionally or unintentionally interpret while writing, have perfect translating capabilities, etc. etc. Also, I have observed many small and large paradoxes in the Bible that have hindered my ability to believe in the entity as a whole.
5)No. Same as reason 2.
6)No. Same as reason 2.
7)No. Same as reason 4.
No. Same as reason 4.
9)No. Same as reason 2.
Haha sorry for all of the boring responses. I have other reasons for not believing in some of these gods, but I feel the ones I provided are sound enough. Yet still, I am not an atheist.
A religion, to me, is a common ground that people put their faith in without evidence that aims to explain. These explanations can result in many, many effects that can be healthy or unhealthy for the individual, which allows for a completely subjective definition of what religion means and what things taught from religion mean to the individual.
Of course, one does not have to believe in a religion to believe in God.
Your statement,
applies to me too. However, I'd sooner believe in Big Foot than believe in no God, as the evidence for his existence is closer to meeting my standard of belief but still insufficient =D.No religion's mythology meets my standard of belief.
But, in terms of moral values taught, ethics, mythology, and everything else in the religions stated, I would say that I see a little bit of my own beliefs in 2, 4, 7, and 8. All the other ones (minus 1) I just do not know anything about. I am sure if I searched deep enough in genuine Greek mythology would find areas I agree with; however, I have never actually read direct translations o Greek myths, so I only rely on secondary sources for my interpretations of it.
-
- Posts: 33
- Joined: July 2nd, 2010, 12:23 pm
- Contact:
To subscribe to a type of God is to divide God. When the Earth was created, I doubt that there was a general body meeting between Gods, Gurus and leaders of different faiths to see how evolution could lead to salvation or any such theory.
We are so caught in the method we use that we have taken our eyes off the destination. Enjoying the journey is not even on our agenda.
I am much more comfortable with the theory of a creator who is hiding in his creation.
-
- Posts: 739
- Joined: July 10th, 2009, 3:24 am
I do not believe in the physical existence of such beings if that is what you mean, simply because I do believe in scientific explanations for why the world is as it is, which excludes the possibility of their hand in it. To be honest neither do i "believe" in their morals, for the greco-roman gods where AS flawd morally as mortals, hence in greco-roman society religion & ethics where separate entities. Ironically though this makes the personalities of the gods, far more "believable" & realistic!
Do you believe Allah as described in Islam exists? If not, why not?
I think a monotheist creator deity like Allah or the God of the Bible is a fair bit more plausible than the older pagan deities on the basis of the logical problem of infinate causal regress. The best explanation for reality's existence is that reality has some kind of tautological source. However, I see of no logical reason that that source MUST be a conscious entity that has a personality, or that still intervenes in nature, which is what Judaism, Christianity & Islam claim. Whilst an atom, or a neutron star may be "conscious" for a fraction of a milisecond (according to quantum mechanics anyway), that is miles away from having a personality or having human traits like compassion, or being able to intervene in nature later on! In brief, it's not that I believe in the impossibility of a conscious creator source, to the contray I think that is the best explanation, BUT that does NOT make me a monotheist, because a conscious creator source is miles away from being a GOD, for a monotheist GOD has a personality, omnipotence and an ability to influence later on. I believe that such a conscious creator source would only exist for a fraction of a second, after which it would become that which it creates, hence I would say that I am a pantheist.
p.s. From what I know of the Kuran, most of it is very reasonable, which really confuses me because there are a lot of Muslims who genuinely seem to be making their own Islam and not listening to the real message. For a religion that means "peace", some Muslims arn't very peaceful, but then, the same can be said of christianity!
Do you believe Xenu and the thetans as described by Scientology exist?
I do believe that extra terrestrial "life" (albeit not "life" that works in the same biological way that life on earth does) is out there simply because I must weigh up the size of the universe against the probability of something like "life" having the right physical conditions to develop, and actually if you do this the probability is quite high! But I don't believe it is high enough for there to be a great odds that we will ever discover it! The universe is THAT vast you see!
Do you believe "God" as described by Christianity exists? If not, why not?
(See answer on Allah)
p.s. Christianity is actually my least favourite religion, not because of all the obvious things like crusades and inquistion, but because it is the only religion in the world (to my knowledge) to actually worship a deity that allows eternal suffering! At least in Judaism & Islam hell is at worst temporary, and thus there is a consceivable point to it (learning from one's mistakes etc), but eternal damnation is the single most pointless and callous idea to have ever been invented! On top of that you have all the obvious stuff like the idea of circumventing moral responsibilty onto someone else which I couldn't disagree with more! Also the homophobia and implied sexism, as well as the total disregard for the equal validty of every other religon! Don't even get me started on the many layers of sexual paranoia. Also the fact that some of the ten commandments are actually impossible! "thou shalt not covert thy neighbors etc", sorry, as if you have a CHOICE?! I want what I want, I can't do anything about that, I can choose not to act on said emotion sure, but that ISN'T what the commandment says, it says your not allowed to "want" stuff! So we arn't even allowed to "think" out of line! If that isn't threatening I don't know what is. As for the other commandments well, they arn't half extremist if taken literally! "Thou shalt not steal", ok, what if i'm starving, if i don't steal I starve, which is suicide & i'm fairly sure that's a mortal sin, ergo I can't win! "Thou shalt not kill", ok, how do we defend ourselves & our loved ones then?!
No, I don't like christianity at all!
Do you believe in Amaterasu and Susanoo and the other gods of the Shinto religion? If not, why not?
I don't know much about Shinto, only that they have that awsome ceremoney where they go nuts with the burning torches once in a while! But due to my ignorance I'm not going to insult them by claiming any belief which i have no real reason to have!
Do you believe in Cai Shen the Chinese god of prosperity and Zao Jun the Chinese kitchen god as described by Chinese traditional religion?
No, simply because I have never actually heard of them.
Do you believe Adonai as described by Judaism exists? If not, why not?
(See answer to Allah)
p.s. The old testiment is even darker, more irrational and unpleasant than the New One!!!
Do you believe Vishnu, Indra, Agni and the other Hindu gods exist? If not, why not?
Hinduism (like budhism) is a bit more in the habit of being taken metaphorically than most religions I think. As literary anthropomorphic personications of nature, I believe some of the Hindu Gods are very true. I only don't believe in these beings if they are viewed as physically existing!
Do you believe in Waheguru the god of the Sikhism religion? If not, why not?
Again, I know very little of this god and so I'm not going to insult Siks by pretending to believe something that I don't.
Yeh, I think that covers most of my stance on religion
-
- Posts: 136
- Joined: April 15th, 2010, 8:19 am
Yes I believe in the Classical Gods, of Olympus, but none of the others you list and heres why.
I believe in the reality of the divine and that it is ineffable. That the divine is ineffable is the only common ground of all religions, or at least the ones that have a developed theological tradition. The rest, of religion, is mere detail and as 'the Gods are in the details' here they are.
Polytheism predates monotheism as far as the archeological record and history of religious texts is concerned, so I favor polytheism as historically antique. That deals with any of the monotheistic religions you list, I don't believe monotheism is a genuine expression of authentic religion, because it's a recent innovation and in my opinion politically motivated. Monotheism is only one god away from atheism.
As far as other polytheistic religions are concerned, I am a 'Westerner' and follow the religious traditions appropriate to my Western Culture. It's not that I believe the gods of other cultures are wrong or false I just don't believe in them because they are not the Gods of my cultural traditions. There is the possibility that we all worship the same Gods through our different cultural lenses so that Ammon is really Zeus and Osiris is Dionysus?
So what do I believe the Gods really are, what is their true nature? Our ancestors built altars on top of mount Olympus, they had the same stories as we do and yet after climbing the sacred mountain and finding no palaces up there still built altars to the Gods. Clearly they didn't believe that the Gods were merely super-humans, as portrayed in Marvel Comics.
I don't accept that the myths were essentially mankinds attempts to explain natural phenomenon, although they may have been that to many people. I see the myths at mankinds attempts to understand the divine natures, the ultimate reality. I'm not alone in this as the philosophers, especially the Neoplatonists, also took this view.
The Gods I believe in are ultimate realities.
Hesiod
-
- Posts: 9
- Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:46 pm
So while I don't literally believe in any of the above gods, I don't completely dismiss them either. The gods exist because we have created them out of our need to exist as a community. I also believe in Santa Claus because December would be so dreary without him.
-
- Banned
- Posts: 348
- Joined: June 19th, 2010, 10:30 pm
Let me make this easier for you to follow Scott, your belief in natural law is foolish. Your supposed Natural man made law disowns people and disregards their lives in favor of himself. Pleas explain to me
what you mean by natural law?
Scott said
Scott its natural for cannibals to eat people so thats ok with you then ..as long as its natural and has evidence.I don't believe things without evidence, particularly supernatural things that would invalidate currently known natural laws concluded from valid inductive inference.
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5765
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Abiathar, your belief that the gods of many old religions may have been aliens is interesting. But why do you only seem to consider it in #8 and #9? Why don't you think it is just as likely that the gods of ancient Greek's religion in #1? What about angels and demons that some Christians, Jews and Muslims believe exist and sometimes even believe have contacted them? Do you think those might be aliens? To you, is the claim that someone was contacted by a real alien more or less plausible than the claim that one was contacted by a real god or by a real supernatural creature doing a real god's bidding?
Alun, would you consider yourself a deist? If not, why not? If you do, then what do you think is different about deism as opposed to atheism other than the use of the term god; in other words do you think deists actually tend to believe something different exists than atheists or do they choose to call something that atheists think exists god?
Zewpals, since your answer is no on all nine, that seems consistent. I think you make a good point when you mention how things that used to be explained as being caused by a god have since been explained with material causes. I imagine that a lot more current mythology that attempts to explain things that are under current science hard to understand or unknown will also be explained materially leading to people giving up the mythology. So I think your point speaks directly to the growing trouble modern religion's have trying to stay socially relevant when they rely on rituals based off mythology that is mostly no longer needed or really believed. What do you think?
Tofreethemind, you speak of a hidden creator, so I'll ask you the same question I asked Alun: Are you a deist? If so, what do you think is different about deism as opposed to atheism other than the use of the term god? In other words, do you think deists actually tend to believe something different exists than atheists or do they choose to call something that atheists think exists god?
Simon says..., I like that you brought up seeing some so-called gods as literary anthropomorphic personifications of nature. In that way, we can compare them to mother nature, father time, lady fortune and even phrases personifications like "The sun wakes up in morning and goes to bed at night." Thus we can believe in them as metaphors, and even indirectly gain valuable literal information from such beliefs (such as the sun sets at night). I think there is a lot more value in a so-called religion that chooses to consider its mythology to be metaphor. Frankly, I don't see as anything but irrational to say a Christian's literal belief in a talking snake is as incorrect as a an ancient Greek person's belief that Zeus and his parents literally exist. But if we look at these things as metaphors that are admittedly not literally true, they and the rituals based off them can have more use. In analogy, we know Santa Claus is not real but that makes the secular Christmas rituals based on Santa that much more worthwhile. What do you think?
Therapon, what about when the gods of one religion are claimed to have said the gods of a different religion are false? What do you mean when you say, "The Gods I believe in are ultimate realities?"
Idigress, do you think the idea of most gods was created like the idea of Santa Claus, in other words as a game or a metaphor to give theme to rituals? Do you think most people who have practiced a religion throughout history didn't think the religion's mythology was literally true but just thought the rituals were useful like the rituals based off a shared (and pretend) belief in Santa Claus?
Eveready, to answer your question, I do not believe in any gods, by which I mean any supernatural creatures or alleged omnipotent, conscious or supernatural creator of some material thing (like thunder) or of everything. To answer you other question, when I say natural laws, I mean observed physical laws like gravity and the conservation laws. In other words, the very type of thing which an alleged supernatural event would, by definition, be allegedly violating.
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
-
- Posts: 220
- Joined: July 6th, 2010, 2:15 pm
I jump in because as much as I am interested in the reasons for people to (don't) believe in (the existence and/or nature of) God, I would like to know if you believe in gravitons, black holes, virtual quantas (which defies the law of conservation of energy), the Higgs' boson, even the Big bang (wich is based on the 'existence' of virtual quantas and hypothesized since we think/believe the universe is expanding, our galaxies move away from one another)?
If you do, can you provide reasons and/or some objective causes (i.e. evidence) for your beliefs... As you NOR ANYONE ELSE have 'seen' these scientific objects. They haven't been empirically proven (for the Big Bang it's a little more complex I admit. That's why I differenciated it from the others.)
Thank you.
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5765
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Please note, just because I have never "seen" something doesn't mean I don't think it has credible empirical evidence supporting it. I have never seen people populating Somalia that I can remember, but I still think Somalia is populated and to be more exact believe that it's population is a little above 10.1 million.
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
- Abiathar
- Posts: 247
- Joined: April 29th, 2008, 5:32 pm
- Location: Angkor Wat.
Well, to be honest, in reference to 1, the idea from 1 can be applied to 8 and 9, and the idea of 8 and 9 can be applied to 1. Both are valid from my stand point.Abiathar, your belief that the gods of many old religions may have been aliens is interesting. But why do you only seem to consider it in #8 and #9? Why don't you think it is just as likely that the gods of ancient Greek's religion in #1? What about angels and demons that some Christians, Jews and Muslims believe exist and sometimes even believe have contacted them? Do you think those might be aliens? To you, is the claim that someone was contacted by a real alien more or less plausible than the claim that one was contacted by a real god or by a real supernatural creature doing a real god's bidding?
You didn't ask about angel's and demons, as those would have been grouped with 1,8, and 9.
I have more proof of the existence of an alien (or human being that has learned to manipulate the material world) than I do of a God... Atleast a God that would care enough to actually take an active part in human evolution/civilization.
-
- Posts: 220
- Joined: July 6th, 2010, 2:15 pm
Sorry Scott, but:Scott wrote:Persecrates, I believe black holes exist and I believe the Big Bang happened. I'm not sure about the other things you mentioned because I just don't know much about them. I can say that I am generally willing to believe a proposition or accept a theory on the basis that the accredited scientific community has a near consensus about the proposition having empirical evidence indicating its true or the theory having been validated by the scientific method.
1 - So you can believe in hypotheses/claims that YOU cannot verify as truth, then. Without the scientific knowledge to understand it by yourself. You believe in (trust) scientists (community) to not only don't lie but don't make mistakes.
Isn't that what we could call a "leap of faith"?
2 - As I said, you can verify it by yourself, there is NO empirical evidence for the phenomena I cited.
Note that I didn't speak about gravity as a theory but about "gravitons" which are quantas (yet to be discovered) that would valid (empirically) the gravity theory.
As I said, for the Big Bang it's a little more complex. I don't want to pollute your thread too much, and we can still form a valid basis for discussion with the examples I gave you. (We could add others like dark matter, worm holes..)
So, as there is no empirical evidence (the scientist community recognize that fact), isn't it again a leap of faith?
Meaning, why is it so easy and justified for you to BELIEVE scientists when neither you nor them have proof (beside mathematical constructions/equations) to back-up these hypotheses?
How is it different (focusing on these exemples which are at the very heart of modern science) from religious belief?
Again, the theory of gravity is based on the existence of "gravitons", if they are not found the theory is worthless.I also consider results of my own empirical observations and inexpert uses of the scientific method to count as convincing empirical evidence for my own purposes and to justify my own personal beliefs. For instance, I also believe in the fact of gravity and the theory of gravity.
Still science claim this theory to be true till someone proves it wrong. What about the burden of proof, then??
There may be a force explaining the semingly existing law of attraction. But it can very well be a different one than gravity... and its gravitons.
I agree. But it is still a loose conception of knowledge.Please note, just because I have never "seen" something doesn't mean I don't think it has credible empirical evidence supporting it. I have never seen people populating Somalia that I can remember, but I still think Somalia is populated and to be more exact believe that it's population is a little above 10.1 million.
That's why the word of belief is so commonly used (e.g. by you here), so wide spread... It's so much an easier concept to use... But its price is confusion.
By the way we can use logical proof, instead of empirical ones sometimes. Very useful and as much valid.
The problem with scientific logic/method is that the scientists claiming to use it aren't very restrictive in their definition of logic. And this contrary to what many believe.
Also, they have, as everyone else, beliefs and desires that impair their "logic".
And to conclude, as much as mathematics seem to be a formal language, the vocabulary (concepts, new or ancient ones) and even the grammar (laws) can be changed as quantum physics did in the last century...
Even mathematics are potentially subjected to "irrational logic"...
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5765
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023